LOL. Classic case of the kettle calling the pot, black. You have two blown-up systems and one only tradable on C2 and not in real life. The last person who should be calling any other system crappy.
Chris
I see you have a tendency to rather do personal attacks than to stay on topic. Why does an understanding of how Sharpe Ratio work naturally follow that someone should be able to create a good system? Does Tiger Woods ask his instructors if they are so good, why aren’t they playing in the PGA instead of instructing?
So, according to you, only people who offer systems should be allowed to post in the forum?
Chris
If you would understand a little bit more then you would offer a good system. But this seems not to be the case.
Not at all Chris, but its always easier to theoretically discuss instead of proving it in reality
You have crappy systems yourself and call other systems crappy.
You don’t understand Sharpe Ratio, but try to argue about it.
Post from people like you who have no understanding about the subject matter and prefer to make personal attacks instead of offering insights about the topic under discussion, is not protecting anyone.
Someone need to understand the theory of something to know how useful this is, otherwise this is just a meaningless number. You are a prime example of someone who is confused by Sharpe Ratio which believe that it is the Alpha and Omega of rating systems. Posts which point out the disadvantage is much more useful than yours who is blind to any other viewpoints.
We have pointed out the disadvantages of Sharpe Ratio and suggested the Expectancy score might be more worthwhile. You have not offer anything other than making incorrect statements without any information you based it on and personal attacks to people who disagree with you.
You are not protecting anyone. You just display your ignorance and poor character. This is senseless to reason with you anymore. You have no understanding about the topic and just make personal attacks because you have nothing else to offer. On top of it, you do not even have enough conviction in your statements to provide your name to stand behind it.
Chris
Again, you are changing the topic because you cannot offering anything.
Why would understanding of how Sharpe Ratio work, result in someone creating a good system? Does this mean that all statistic professors should be able to create good trading systems?
Also, assuming your statement is correct that someone who understand Sharpe Ratio a little bit should be able to offer a good system. Then this mean that anyone who understand what the performance statistics offered by C2 mean, should be able to create a good system. What is the point of C2 then? Everyone should be able to create their own systems then.
Chris
It already has been proven. Many good systems have low Sharpe Ratios due to the way it is calculated. Not only on C2, but in the real world as well. Someone else already gave you examples of billionaires who will probably laugh at Sharpe Ratios.
Chris
Chris
It’s extremly disturbing and bad minded when someone is talking about not tradeable systems if he has never tried to trade them. Additionally we don’t need your statements to know whether a system is tradeable or not. Matthew has done a very good job with the Realism Index and now everyone has an excellent indication of tradeable or not. So please let the numbers speak for the themselves. We don’t need your advice. If you are that good then please try to prove that in reality and not in blaming C2 and others. In the past you were too disappointed from C2 because you didn’t get enough advise and you wanted to leave C2. Many people welcomed the fact that you would leave. So now you are back and you blame vendors with good statistics. So now everyone knows who is attacking without having to offer something. Once you get good numbers with your system then we can again look into it
Regards
Chris
You may have missed the point. The criteria for good systems are mainly
1) high Realism index
2) high P/L per unit
3) smooth Equity Curve
4) high Sharpe Ratio
The sharpe ratio is one very good indication but not the abolute one. And all these Buffett, Soros, and Robertson were operating with hundert of millions allowing them to extremly diversify. C2’s subscribers don’t belong to this investment category.
Regards
Fanus
Sorry, I din’t want to get offensive (maybe this became because english is not the native language) but I wanted to state you that with systems showing negative sharpe ratios you are on the wrong way and you may rethink your trading techniques.
Sorry again
high Realism Factor
Agreed.
>high P/L per unit
Agreed.
>smooth Equity Curve
Agreed, if you mean closed-equity curve not open-equity curve.
>The sharpe ratio is one very good indication but not the abolute one.
Agreed. The Sharpe ratio is a good “relative” measure of different returns, but it’s not an “absolute” measure that’s trustable from one source to another because there are different ways to calculate the Sharpe, and you can’t assume that the Sharpe as claimed by one place is comparable to the Sharpe as claimed by another. You have to calculate it yourself so you have an apples-to-apples comparison. But I think that’s probably true for most measures. There are still other variables in how you calculate the Sharpe. (E.g. linear vs. exponential, log returns vs. absolute returns, etc.) Do it yourself on everything you want to compare so you know you’re looking at the same thing on all of them. Prof. Sharpe didn’t define it tightly enough. It is true that of 2 systems that have the same expectancy score (refined by Realism Factor), the one with lower volatility expressed in the form of a higher Sharpe Ratio will make more money over time just as illustrated in the famous fable of the tortoise and the hare: slow and steady wins the race.
>And all these Buffett, Soros, and Robertson were operating with hundert of millions allowing them to extremly diversify. C2’s subscribers don’t belong to this investment category.
Compounding returns can trump any capital requirement. Here’s what trading and investing legend, Richard Dennis, has said about making money in the markets…
“I always say you could publish rules in a newspaper and no one would follow them. The key is consistency and discipline.”
The above quote is from the book, “Market Wizards” by Jack Schwager. Dennis is a guy who, as a trader, took a measly $400 and grew it into an estimated $200 million dollars in a matter of years – not decades – by being disciplined and following his rules. He is such a legend that several other “Market Wizards” interviewed in Schwager’s book described Dennis with the comment, “I’m not in his league.” Please read the full article here:
Newsletter Preference Center
These days, few traders find it profitable to scalp or trade intraday (without holding positions overnight) over the long-run anymore. Most traders prefer to make swing trades, but swing trading can be boring at times. Depending on your total capital, it is hard to make too many swing trades and also limit risk. You can make only a few trades, and you usually must wait at least a few days before you can take any action. Assuming that your trade setup isn’t completely wrong, it takes a little time to find out what happens. All you can do is execute a trade, or a few swing trades, and wait. It takes a certain kind of trader to swing trade, a patient trader. A scalper, for example, wants to get in and get out. Waiting patiently is hard. It’s an uneasy feeling. Other traders may like to put on trades for excitement, and they just can’t wait to see what happens. In the meantime, the waiting is agony. It can be tedious waiting to see the outcome.
Pal
Thank you for the fact that you brought the discussion back to the hard facts and away from the emotional ones. You are basically right with your statement but I would add that whether you prefer to follow a scalping system or a swing one is much depending on how much capital and risk you want to take and it’s absolutely correct that swing systems are are better suitable for very big accounts. But my impression is that the majority of C2’ subscribers starts with small accounts and hope to grow by time. The real big accounts have usually better solutions to follow. But this is only an impression.
Thank you
Panos
Well, how small is a small account. There is the mini-forex market where one can start with as little as $1K and ETFs/mini-futures/Midam contracts with $10K.
Learning to control emotions rather than being unemotional (stoic) is more important. It is easy to say, be fearful/greedy/hopeful when others are greedy/fearful/hopeless and vice-versa, but how many people can really do that, consistently. Maybe people like Warren Bufffet, because he said be greedy when others are fearful and he proved it by going against the whole world, taking positions in stocks that others would not touch, with unrealistic leverages (that would make me faint) on the strength of his convictions earning the title, the ultimate long-term investor (who made his fortune by compounding around 18.5% return over a period of 35 years); I just adapted the rest.
The tagline for Mattel’s (NYSE: MAT) classic board game Othello reads “A minute to learn, a lifetime to master.” In a nutshell, that phrase means that the rules of the game are quite simple to grasp, but becoming an expert takes significant time and experience. In truth, the same thing can be said about successful trading/investing. Just like in Othello, the rules of successful trading/investing are simple, but mastering them takes a concerted effort.
Anyway, everybody has to reach their own conclusions logically wherever it leads them.
For an alternative to Sharpe Ratio that does not penalize upside volatility I would recommend looking into Sortino Ratios.
Again
As long as you have nothing to offer and you only repeat what others say you better be quiet, idiot.
Actually, that would be you who have nothing to offer on the topic and can only offer personal attacks. Your message above, case in point.
Chris
Your quote:
"In the past you were too disappointed from C2 because you didn’t get enough advise and you wanted to leave C2. Many people welcomed the fact that you would leave."
Prove it. Yet another of your completely baseless statements.
Of course your system is not tradeable. Anyone who can double their money in a few months will have no need for C2. How about YOU prove your system is tradeable? Scan your brokerage statements for the last 3 months and upload them to a website for all to see.
The fact that I don’t have a system have nothing to do with the advantages and disadvantages of Sharpe Ratio. If I have 10 systems, or none, Sharpe Ratio still is what it is. If you would rather spend the time to study the topic under discussion rather than just make personal attacks, your posts will be helpful. Now, they are just a waste of time.
So, I am leaving you with two tasks now.
1. Prove your system is trabeable by providing broker statements. Surely you are trading such a good system yourself?
2. Prove that I wanted to leave C2.
If you cannot, stop wasting everyone’s time.
Chris.
At present, the 3 best systems featured on the front page have a median 29% realism index.
Very good joke Matthew!
If I hadn’t to pay for it, I’d easily build the best performing system on C2 in 2 months. But of course it would be a fake system, with 20-50% realism index.
I tried a superior e-mini system, with 100% realism index. In reality, I was able to enter every losing trades, but never had time to get the winners, even while keeping my finger on the mouse all day, waiting for the next signal.
That’s a very bad joke.
