I hesitate to post yet as I’m only just bringing this model to C2 but I want to add my two cents here… Like some of the others that are here, I’m a professional trader, and by professional I mean a registered CTA that has managed money in a previous life.
When I was promoting my model and track record to some of the newer upstart hedge funds, I was never asked what my Hold and Hope ratio was. Every meaningful measurement of a traders performance already exists in basic statistical approaches.
This indicator by its very name paints a negative picture of certain models that it shouldn’t; and system providers who have sound risk profiles in-tact may suffer as a result, which is unfair and unfortunate.
In my opinion, C2 should be sticking with standard risk measurements that people are familiar with and should avoid intentionally painting a negative picture of a model that doesn’t fit into a single persons ideal of good trading.
The traders that do Hold and Hope will eventually wash out, there is little reason then to make the rest of look bad and potentially hurt our ability to promote our models.
If developers are unable to promote sound models and attract clients, there will be little reason to promote them on C2, which is bad for everyone considered.
>The traders that do Hold and Hope will eventually wash out, there is little reason then to make the rest of look bad and potentially hurt our ability to promote our models.<
When the washout occurs, how many unsuspecting subscribers will washout also, never to subcribe again, and passing on their bad experience at C2 to as many people possible.
One of C2’s primary responibilities must be to protect subscribers, or risk mantaining the site on a small herd of new sheep.
"there is little reason then to make the rest of look bad and potentially hurt our ability to promote our models. "
The only systems that will look bad is those that incur high drawdown for their net profit. They should look bad. This is called risk.
Max Open Draw Down, Average Open Draw Down will give subscribers a solid calculation to determine if the losses held on to justify the gains.
It is what it… I’m not going to argue over it, I’m just not sure I’m interested in having my system measured by something that is not recoganized as an industry standard stat and paints an overtly negative picture by its very name. I’m probably not alone in that.
In the end we can debabte it till the cows come home, C2 has to decide how they represent themselves and the image they want to paint. Maybe we should get rid of the Sharpe Ratio and replace it wiith the “Holy Rollercoaster Indicator”…
Sharpe is good, but I wonder how many new subscribers are mystified by its meaning or purpose…
Although I will say, it is good to see this forum active. Too many times, it is a dead place. Be nice if people keep voicing opinions, suggestions, and issues.
>Sharpe is good, but I wonder how many new subscribers are mystified by its meaning or purpose… >
Past disscussions here about the Sharpe Ratio could lead one to believe that even seasoned traders and system developers are mystified.
> I hesitate to post yet as I’m only just bringing this model to C2 but I want to add my two cents here…
Perhaps you are unaware of C2’s recent history? Several “top” systems
had total meltdowns in the last 8 months. Many of these did indeed employ a “hold and hope” strategy during a market’s trend phase. I suspect that when the current trends end there will once again be more than a few unhappy subscribers.
> Like some of the others that are here, I’m a professional trader, and by professional I mean a registered CTA that has managed money in a previous life.
One key difference between C2 and CTA’s is that C2 vendors do not trade real money and sometimes could care less what subscribers with real money go through. Check some of the current top rated C2 systems for excellent examples.
> In my opinion, C2 should be sticking with standard risk measurements that people are familiar with and should avoid intentionally painting a negative picture of a model that doesn’t fit into a single persons ideal of good trading.
Stats are often unfair and misleading…even “standard risk measurements”. Look at the Sharpe Ratio on your young system.
Ross, I’m sure most of them are and its unfortunate. If you’re going to be a trader, even if you’re going implament someone elses strategy as a means to mitigate risk of other models or as a stand alone app its important you do your home work before…
If you run into something you don’t understand, you educate yourself on the subject. People take trading too lightly. C2 has an opportunity to help educate the subscribers; instead of creating new idicators maybe we should be better explaining the industry standards… Creating a knowledge base for traders to refer too and educate themselves with.
My prescence here has very little to do with the model I’m trading (although if it gets some following it would be nice)… After the collapse at Refco, my days as a money manager were pretty much over; now I work as the Senior Analyst at FXStreet.com…
I’ve also recently been made Content Manager for two of the largest sections. My primary job is to find new partnerships, where content and or product can be promoted in a mutually beneficial way… System sellers need subscribers, our readers need content and incentives… You can see where this is headed.
One of my primary concerns with content etc, is that, what I’m putting in front of the readers is legit, functions as advertised, and helps them become better at what they do… It’s too early for me to know if there is potenial for a mutually beneficial partnership here and I can only present the idea with my reccomendation, the final say isn’t mine…
With that said, I’d be hesitant right now to promote something that would rather use an unkown, and somewhat negatively named measurement over standard stats…
The first step for me right now is to test the platform and get a feel for how the thing works and functions (and see if I can still trade 
) If I’m comfortable with the application I’m going to try to find a way to work with Matt and the management at FXS to pull this in; its good for all parties concerned if we can make it work…
> I’ve also recently been made Content Manager…
You may find this helpful:
http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/toolbar/
Its has an inline spell checker.
>C2 has an opportunity to help educate the subscribers; instead of creating new idicators >
Do you forget the Sharpe Ratio was not always around. Perhaps the H&H will also become an industry standard.
C2 is helping to educate subscribers, with a much needed indicator. There are new things happening here at C2, and this has caused the need for new tools.
You sound stuck. Pull up your feet and move to a new place. And perhaps you to will add to the C2 experience just as Ross is attempting to do.
Well, if credentials are being compared or mean anything, I work at a major Investment Bank. I have been trading for around 20 years. I am a leveraged instruments person, especially futures/commodities. I trade for myself.
The indicator is negatively named for a reason. Because that is what many try to do. This is not Disneyland. Yes, new people should educate themselves, but seasoned people should also strive to reach out and help/protect them. And C2 should provide any easy to use tools that keeps them away from devious or clueless system vendors.
I would say it is quite possible that I have followed, analyzed, subscribed to, dissected, more live trading systems than anyone in history (for their own trading). I said previously, 1200 or so, but 3000 systems is possible. I have not tracked the number. I have seen more snakes, cons, tricks, deluded/naive/self-hypnotized system creators than I care to list.
Almost everything I see in classical technical analysis is no better than random. My method is to take a system, run it through various statistical tests (excel, mostly), and see it it is still a possibility. Even when I find the rare system that works, it rarely lasts once the current market structure/geometry changes significantly.
I find most subscribers have way too much belief, way too little doubt, and are easy to seduce. My main interest is to grab them away from the oncoming truck, when they have the deer-in-the-headlights look… Hold & Hope is the best thing I have seen to do this, although other measures are also quite important. A Hold & Hope of 2 months does not gaurantee anything. Any system with a lengthy track record is much more interesting.
I can now usually, receive a signal provider’s website, newsletter, signals, etc. and within 30 minutes, tell you why it is unlikely to work. (No, this is not an offer to perform this in front of a live television audience). If people try this, I will charge an upfront fee !!!
John, thank you for an excellent post. I believe that this site has a great future ahead IF it can avoid the trap that so many sites have fallen into, of letting a couple members create rules and dictate policies that are detrimental to others, and to the site. The result is so often that folks simply stop putting forth the effort to be involved, and the site dies.
In this particular case, some members have taken it upon themselves to create system measures in order to “improve” on those created by Nobel prize winners, and others that are universally applied by professionals judging performance. In attempting to ‘protect’ subscribers from their supposed ignorance of a system’s methodology, their hearts are in the right place. But the result of their actions is to take a broad-brush swipe at other systems that don’t conform to the indicator, and that suffer for it.
How this fits into C2s efforts to attract new system developers, I can’t figure.
“This is called risk” :
how do you explain that a system like ''rocket science mini dow " wich is clearly a "buy & hope " system with a worst open drawdown of 9% , 7% , 6% of the equity on only one trade just to keep a great winning % ratio can be rated like a very good system with your formula ?
I fail to see your statistical evidence of why this indicator has little value. This is nothing but an opinion. God ahead, show how the indicator resutls do not do what it says.
Show how the “Nobel Prize” winning helps the new person find the better systems here. Perhaps you would care to describe Black-Scholes with the new people coming here?
Do, don’t say.
> In this particular case, some members have taken it upon themselves to create system measures in order to "improve" on those created by Nobel prize winners, and others that are universally applied by professionals judging performance.
Where does anyone suggest changing or dropping the Sharpe, etc?
See how well established CTA sites scrutinize risk / reward:
http://www.autumngold.com/ManagedFutures/BookTableofContents.htm
One has to ask what the indicator would look like if the system did NOT average down. Perhaps it would be higher. Then an informed subscriber would also look that the system has basically been flat since early December. And look at other indicators.
Picking out an individual trade or system does not shine much light on the overall issue.
Ross, are you a writer? Someone said that.
You may find this helpful:
http://www.google.com/tools/firefox/toolbar/
Its has an inline spell checker.
It always amazes me how little time it takes members of a forum to take cheap shots… First I’m not trying to impress any one with my credentials… I’m just letting you know that I’ve worked in the industry as a professional trader and have an idea of how traders are measured and judge… that’s all. Without a doubt there are traders here who have more experience than myself.
I’m in a position to potentially promote every model on the site… But I had concerns and voiced them. I’m more than happy to build a track-record for this variation of my model on C2 and just leave it at that… I think when the dust settles the HH reading on Arete will be around 50 to 65 give or take and traders can make of it what they will…
I’m not interested in getting into a war of words or getting myself dragged through the mud by the other system developers… Simply not worth the trouble.
On a different note, I’m looking for a trader who would be interested in doing live commentary two or three days a week around 22:00GMT to our Premium Subscriber base; you would be allowed to promote your service in each show; we may also be able to set you up with a Blog on FXStreet where you could also direct traffic to your model. You can reach me at john@fxstreet.com if you’re interested.
> It always amazes me how little time it takes members of a forum to take cheap shots…
I’m the worst speller here. It is not a shot, only a helpful suggestion…
If you are a pro blogger, and you are using C2 to promote yourself,
wouldn’t a free inline spell checker be helpful? Make your posts look
a little more intelligent and professional?
> On a different note, I’m looking for a trader who would be interested in doing live commentary two or three days a week around 22:00GMT to our Premium Subscriber base;
What do you pay? 
Sam… we don’t, almost all of our content providers partner with us to promote their core product; they give us good content and we give them good exposure. It may not work for everyone, but the majority of people who do get involved with FXS stay for a very long time so it must work on some level.
Drop me a line if you’re interested, I’m open to discussing it with anyone, can give you an idea of what we’re looking for etc.
