> even if you missed some trades. But on the other hand, this might causse you to miss the best trades,
I think this would happen a lot. The very best trades often tend to be in a
hurry. Moreover, there is a lot of evidence from subscriber posts here on C2 of this exact case: many limit order systems lost 50-70% in their translation to real time fills.
sheesh - I read this before realizing who it was from. And then I realized the tone of the post sounded way too familiar.
Theses posts were not a debate or trying to be right. These posts were about how other people trade, to see how they trade systems, and what works the best and what they would suggest.
Don’t you have anything better to do than to be the eternal devil’s advocate? Have you posted anything in the last 6 months that actually helps others or seeks to better your own understanding? Can you point us to them?
Go throw yourself into a bowl of chili…
> Not quite. As you do quite often, you changed the question/statement to fit your answer so that you can be right.
Actually that is EXACTLY what you are doing. Please back up and read the whole thread…you will see I adjusted the $3 example to fit actual systems
on a percentage basis. I did my homework. I provided details while trying not to name names and offend anyone.
YOU show me ONE stock system with a $3 per trade average on C2.
So, once again, what is your opinion on the topic of slippage? Do you have ANYTHING intelligent to say about the topic? Or are you just here to attack my post as is your signature?
>>The very best trades often tend to be in a
hurry. <<
That’s where I disagree. From my perspective, the best trades are well planned (time for planning is implied) and the worst are often ‘seat-of-the-pants’ – a quick gut reaction.
> That’s where I disagree. From my perspective, the best trades are well planned (time for planning is implied) and the worst are often ‘seat-of-the-pants’ – a quick gut reaction.
You do not understand my post. I mean the market is in a hurry
to get where it’s going. My point has nothing to do with how long the trade
is planned or how long an order sat there. The point is in the strongest
moves price doesn’t come back. There are no second chances.
> ‘seat-of-the-pants’ – a quick gut reaction.
Not at all what I meant.
No, I do understand your point, Sam. But what I am saying is that I don’t feel compelled to rush into those type of trades. What I do is analyze whetehr the move is strong enough that it is likely to last. Based on that analysis, I may enter the trade the following week if it fits in with the current state of my entire portfolio.
IOW I manage the trade, I don’t let the trade manage me.
I agree, the keyword is “if”. I was trying to point out that Science Trader used that word, so I think that he was correct when he said that slippage should be related to the average profit. Isn’t that the reason why we have discussed PL/unit so often? Anyway, I agree that the example of $3 / share is only theoretical as far as C2 is concerned.
I usually try limit orders if I somehow missed an entry or exit order in autotrading, and also sometimes when I expect much slippage. The problem is exactly as you describe. One move against you might whipe out what you saved earlier on slippage. So it also depends on the timing skills of the vendor, and on the volatility. If he really chooses the optimal time to enter or to exit, and the prices move fast, then any deviation from that time is likely to cause more damage than the possible slippage. If he is not so good, then using a limit order may easily give you an even better price than C2.
> But what I am saying is that I don’t feel compelled to rush into those type of trades.
I guess I don’t understand. My assumption is a well planned entry is
already in and there is no second chance on those very strong moves.
That is the whole point: strong directional moves don’t come back. There are ample posts by C2 subscribers about limit order systems that demonstrate this common tendency. If you are trying to get in “the following week” aren’t you reacting to the market?
Anyway, I’m speaking in generalities here, not about your trading style in particular. I am not criticing your style in any way. I do have a C2 / Sand 2 Pirls 652015 question. While I agree equity and DD’s need to be computed on closed trades, how can C2 determine the win % and whether a trade is a profit or a loss if it’s still open?
“we show only closed trades below.”
(nothing shown)
I assume there are no closed trades? But C2 shows:
Realism Factor 66.5
Trades 23
Profitable 13
Losses 10
Win % 56.5%
Well, I don’t understand thsoe stats on open trades either, Sam. I guess the concept is: “What would we have if all trades were immediately closed?” Supposedly, this is the way the entire industry works, not just C2. Because my system is longer term, I know it will take several months to get a solid record of closed trades at C2.
I think we basically agree on trading philosophy (not immediately chasing breakouts etc.) , but we natuarally think in different time frames. For instance, by waiting, I am not reacting to the market I am putting the recent move (often a retracement) in a larger context for further TA. Thus waiting a few days usually gives me both better anaysis and a better price.
I asked the same question last week about Big Calls in the thread "Hold and Hope changed into APD Ratio" and MK responded
"C2 includes open positions in all stats, including winning % and APD. "
> Supposedly, this is the way the entire industry works, not just C2.
On some stats, like equity yes. Not on W/L, average trade, etc.
And I guess my point is twofold:
1) Although in his example the system will still be profitable,
other stats (like %W/L) may change a lot.
2) If 10 or 20% less profit isn’t “a real issue” to anyone here,
please drop me a line when you do your next trade, or buy
or sell a car or a house. I’ll be your broker :-). If that 10 or 20%
isn’t “a real issue” I’ll be happy to take it off your hands.
Any time. I’m here to serve.
I agree. MK is confusing Market to Market accounting requirement (buying power, margin, etc.) with basing statistics also on Market to Market (which clearly is not a requirement). He does this merely because it is convenient for him, even though it is grossly inaccurate and misleading. All statistics (including equity curve) should be based on closed trades and realized losses, to be considered accurate.
