As the vendor seems not to have any baktest results here some thoughts for this system.
It has been identified as a very risky one:
- Inital capital: 100’000
- Exposure= same used as by the system
- Potential maxDrawdown at a 99% confidence level is 165’000 (65’000 more than the starting capital)
- Annualized%=500. Profit= 500’000
- Annualized% to potential maxDD= 500/165= 3 ( av ery poor ratio for an intraday system. This means the system would need 17 weeks to recover once getting into this drawdown.
- AvrgWin/AvrgLoss ratio= 0.7 ( terrible ratio, poorest risk management)
- The system is a very risky one. A new subscriber risks to loose all his capital and even more (165%). Even by using only half of vendor’s exposure a subscribers risks to loose 70-80% of his initial capital and that week after week. Subscribers risk to loose 70-80% (at half exposure) of their capital to get 250% annual return. This is an extremly low reward to risk ratio for an intraday system. An average intraday system should show at least a reward/risk ratio > 5 and a good one a ratio>10.
- It’s again a vendor ignoring risks and just truying to make impression by only focusing on profits. A vendor like that will never trade such a system for himself. The best you can do to protect you from these risks is to ignore these systems aswell. They just rely on principles like hope and luck and nothing else. They can do very good for a while but if bad then they risk to totally crash.
Good trading to all
As the vendor seems not to have any baktest results here some thoughts for this system.
Mr Peter Huber
It would be very creative, if you could use your energies in a positive way and tell us, what works, according to your fancy calculations. All we hear from you on this board, is that you constantly come up with ways to dissect and invalidate any trading system out there. So either let us know what works, or come up with your own great system…since you have all those creative ways of testing you should be able to come up with something workable, or if you are not willing to risk any money in trading, put your money in your local Sparkasse and be happy with the 2% p/a return you receive for ‘relative’ riskfree investment.
Dear Mr. Peter Pritzl
The purpose here is not to promote the good systems. It’s only a reminder against very high risk systems. However you are always allowed to invest in very high risk systems (like you have done with Hawk and almost got a margin call).
Although I do appreciate that you take the time to give your thoughts on C2 systems, and now including my system, I do not appreciate your grandiose tone.
Spefically, to say things such as: “It’s again a vendor ignoring risks and just truying to make impression by only focusing on profits. A vendor like that will never trade such a system for himself. The best you can do to protect you from these risks is to ignore these systems aswell. They just rely on principles like hope and luck and nothing else. They can do very good for a while but if bad then they risk to totally crash.”
I take offense to the above paragraph… I do trade this system personally. In addition to that, I work very hard sending the signals to C2 - not a simple task when you are managing your own accounts. I do not rely as you say on hope or luck. I am not as you say, trying to make an impression by focusing on profits.
Feel free to post using your observations based on the numbers but how about cutting down on the rhetoric (technique of persuasion through language). This does not engender open discussion about C2 systems. Which, should be the point.
An average intraday system should show at least a reward/risk ratio > 5 and a good one a ratio>10.
I thought that greater than 2 would be sufficient ie., annualized return should be atleast twice that of the max. drawdown for all systems, but I have very limited experience with an intraday system. Why such high standards for an intraday system? The only explanation I could come up with is that one gets squeezed more in intraday trading, so that might be the ratio that works comfortably.
ps: All the chart patterns, indicator values etc., are valid regardless of time-frame. Hence my question. “Risk” points to the understanding that no system is perfect and choices must be made to preserve trading capital through the use of “stop-loss” levels or hedging through diversification including using options or scaling strategies or by reversing positions.
When looking to your message board you were aggressively reffering to profits with no reference to risks. Even as I put the question about the system’s risks you seemed not willing to show them. If you had said for example my system is making 500’000 per year by risking 160’000 drawdown then it would have been perfect. A good vendor should show both parts of his systems not only the sunny one. If you now use to trade this system for yourself (it would be a little bit wondering why to do that as there are some systems with much better reward/risk ratios) then sorry for that, I take it back. Anyway it would be better to operate with small exposures for not getting these large drawdowns.
A return/risk ratio of 2 would be very low for a private investor. That would mean that he has to wait half a year to recover once getting into this max.DD. Maybe are institutional investors happy with less but there is no rational reason to go for less as long as you can get more.
I TRULY BELIEVE THAT NO ONE KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING.
NO LARGE CTA OR HEDGE FUND AS GOOD AS THEY ARE OR WERE, NEVER EVER PRODUCED A RETURN OF 5 OR EVEN 10 TIMES THE RISK REWARD !
NONE, NOT EVEN THE SUPER STARS MANAGING BILLIONS AND BILLIONS !
YOUR MINDS ARE JUST ACADEMICS, THEORICAL, STATISTICAL, “DREAMAL” AND REALLY FRACTAL !
That is why we individual investors have the advantage over professional fund jockeys. Even if they can find good investments in small and medium sized companies, they typically cannot put their money to work, given the size of their accounts.
As Peter Huber says, it is natural for the individual investor to go for return/risk ratios as high as possible and believe it or not there are systems like that in existence.
There you go again. Where was I “agressively referring” to profits on the Athena board? I posted two milestones months apart, $200K and $300K. I could have posted a win/loss milestone or some additional benchmark. I asked you to ease up on the rhetoric (you recall the definition of rhetoric). The Athena board has a handful of posts to date, since the majority are from me they tend to be in project management style, key dates or milestones.
Also, no need to ‘wonder’ why I am trading my system personally. I am doing quite well in that regard. Are you not ready to move on to another system on C2? There are many more out there that need your counsel.
Good luck to you. At least now everyone knows that you neighter have any backtest results nor a good risk management.
Only the very beginners say they don’t exist. For private investors there are plenty of them around. It just needs the abilty to identify them.
As you think that they don’t exist please remind me to never subscribe to your systems as you will never be one of them.
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!!!
Sorry but I was in the financial business for only…30 years.
It also happens that a long time ago I was am early money raiser for the Paul Tudor Jones, Trout, Lou Beacon etc etc.
It also happens that all these guys, at that time, traded Futures with reasonable leverage, not stocks or real estate in cash.
I guess they still are very beginners, unknown and unsucessful for you…based on your statistical, mathemical and irrational mind.
No professional individuals, managers who outsource part or all of their managed money have your expectations of 5 or even 10 times the risk/reward.
Simply because they dont exist, and if they did, it was either never for very long or because it was only…ON PAPER !!!
No doubt about it !
The only certainty is that I will not have drawdowns of over 100 % of my capital on a single trade or in any multiple consecutives trades…like YOUR trading systems that you are so proud of of showing in C2.
No doubt I will survive. No doubt my capital will eventually go up, may down slightly.
No doubt either that when your systems will be blown off, you will change your personal name again as you already did and come up again with new systems.
Contrary to your systems, my system is composed of many systems and that diversify and reduces the risks. Lower leverage ALSO reduces the risk…if you are NOT aware.
You are a a true JUNKIE, because afterall what is a JUNK bond !
Simply a loan taken by an over leveraged and badly managed entity !
And by the way…
if you know someone with a 5 or 10 rimes risk reward why dont you either stop creating trading systems and put your pension fund with that guy ???. That would be wiser than what you actually do and easier.
And if you are a nice guy…you may just as well reveal to this audience the name of that genius, provided the above risk reward return has been done on a minimum of 5 years time frame, AND WITH REAL MONEY, NOT PAPER MONEY OR ONLY BACKTESTED TRACK RECORD !!!
You could even make money by being a money raiser for this genius !!!
I have never been reffering to any specific system here. I’m only reffering to system with high reward/risk ratios and none of the good systems has “over 100 % of my capital on a single trade or in any multiple consecutives trades” so please stop with your BS. If you are not able to produce the good ratios even after 30 years of experience doesn’t mean that other vendors can’t do that. So please dont reply anymore. I don’t have the time to deal with this kind of bad minded messages only because of not having the skills
make your homework and find them by yourself.
Peter Hulbert is right by saying to operate with small exposure for not getting large drawdowns…but then why does he do the exact opposite on
ALL of his “trading” systems ???
I think it is Peter Hulbert who proclaimS himself to be a statistician.
If so, he is not only nut and a liar because ALL his systems dont show how wise he should be…for a true statistician !
When he is telling me that he is testing some ideas with his systems, a true statistician would know that what Peter does has nothing top do with statistics but only gambling without any strategy but with high leverage.
Finally when Peter Hulbert is telling me that his systems are not allowed to take subscribers, THAT IS NOT WHAT IS SHOWN ON THE FRONT PAGE OF HIS SYSTEMS ON THE SITE.
Lying, lying,lying, inventing, inventing is a motto and the logo of this JUNKIE.
Peter Hulbert is only a megalo and he should rather put his nose on his own systems than his mind on others systems.
Every one will feel much better…WITHOUT HIM !