[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Stock Selection was: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - Can it be traded ?



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links




I will 
just try back another day. Thanks again.
 Jayson 
<FONT face=Tahoma 
size=2>-----Original Message-----From: Al Venosa 
[mailto:avcinci@xxxxxxxxxxx]Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 2:33 
PMTo: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSubject: RE: Stock 
Selection was: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - Can it be traded 
?


Oh, I forgot. Sorry about that, Jayson. I was recently in communication with 
Notis about another issue, and he told me there has been a problem with his 
server lately. So, I think the site is temporily down. I'll ask him when it will 
be up and running again.
Al Venosa



>From: "Jayson" 
>Reply-To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>To: 
>Subject: RE: Stock Selection was: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - Can 
it be traded ? 
>Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 13:54:06 -0500 
> 
>Al, 
>I tried the link but it appears to be dead. A goggle search also 
failed. 
>Have you visited this site recently? 
> 
>Jayson 
>-----Original Message----- 
>From: Al Venosa [mailto:avcinci@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
>Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 1:44 PM 
>To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>Subject: Re: Stock Selection was: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - Can 
it be 
>traded ? 
> 
> 
>Fred, 
> 
>Steve Notis sells a trading software called Powerkit 
>(www.byte-research.com). At that site, you can download the user 
manual for 
>free. In that manual, he discusses optimization in great detail, 
so you 
>don't need to buy the TASC article. I believe he may even have a 
discussion 
>of this topic on his web site. 
> 
>Al Venosa 
> 
> 
> >From: "Fred " 
> >Reply-To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> >To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> >Subject: Stock Selection was: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - 
Can it be traded 
>? 
> >Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 18:35:59 -0000 
> > 
> >Jayson, 
> > 
> >Here's the article. Unfortunately TASC wants to charge for 
> >everything they ever printed these days. 
> > 
> >http://store.traders.com/v15261aryour.html 
> > 
> >It begins ... 
> > 
> >Are Your Profits Robust? by Steve Notis 
> > 
> >Your trading system probably has a set of parameters you 
think are 
> >the most profitable. But is it the most consistent? Here's a 

> >technique to find the most robust set that will give you 
regular 
> >profits. 
> > 
> >For those who use trading systems, the most important 
concern should 
> >not be to find parameters that yield the greatest profit; 
rather, it 
> >should be to find the most robust parameters. Anyone can 
tweak a 
> >system until it shows startling results, but unless those 
parameters 
> >are robust, they will not hold up in real-world trading. 
> > 
> >Several testing methods can be used to increase a system's 
> >robustness. The first, and simplest, is to test over long 
periods. 
> >This assures that the test includes a variety of market 
conditions. 
> >The second method is the walk-forward, or blind, data test. 
This 
> >typically consists of optimizing trading parameters over a 
long 
> >period, but stopping short of the present. Finally, the best 

> >parameters are tested over the remaining, nonoptimized, 
data. This is 
> >also referred to as walk-forward, blind, virgin, 
out-of-sample, and 
> >it has even been referred to as real-time testing. 
> > 
> >If the optimized parameters work well over the blind data, 
then it 
> >can be argued that the parameters are robust and likely to 
continue 
> >to work for some time into the future. Since the final test 
is run 
> >without the benefit of hindsight or optimization, it's as 
close to 
> >real trading as you can simulate with historical data. 
However, don't 
> >assume that the most profitable parameters are the best 
parameters - 
> >meaning those that will be the most profitable in the 
future. 
> > 
> >The rest costs $3.95 if you don't have old issues at home 
already. 
> >It's worth a read. 
> > 
> >--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Fred " 
> > wrote: 
> > > Jayson, 
> > > 
> > > That's exactly the point I was trying to make ... 
> > > 
> > > In the example you used and my comments of that 
example the 
> >parameter 
> > > value of 100 may be the best value using increments 
are 25, but it 
> >is 
> > > invisibly a much tighter fit then 91 is. The reason 
for this is 
> >that 
> > > next to 100 is a performance canyon at 102 where the 
DD's skyrocket 
> > > but surrounding 91 are 10 points on either side i.e. 
81 through 101 
> > > where similar results are achieved. 
> > > 
> > > This kind of situation where performance canyons occur 
next to some 
> > > parameter value are common in system development and 
testing making 
> > > the most robust values in the middle of the range 
where similar 
> >MAR's 
> > > are as opposed to maybe where the highest CAR or MAR 
occurs. The 
> > > idea behind system development and optimization of 
course is to 
> >give 
> > > the system the highest chance of success going forward 
as opposed 
> >to 
> > > having bragging rights looking backward. There was a 
good article 
> > > about this in TASC a few years ago which I'll try and 
find the 
> > > reference for if you are interested. 
> > > 
> > > I think Herman did a prestation on this and included a 
usable Excel 
> > > spreadsheet in the files area and although I 
personally don't think 
> > > it goes far enough because it only looks at CAR, I do 
think it's in 
> > > the correct direction. 
> > > 
> > > Fred 
> > > 
> > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Jayson" wrote: 
> > > > Again Fred, it seems to me that what you are 
accomplishing is a 
> > > fit. Going 
> > > > forward will this extremely fine tune hold true? 
As a strong 
> > > proponent of 
> > > > system trading you are probably in a better 
position to answer 
> >that 
> > > question 
> > > > but to me robustness is a measure of how widely 
the the stock (s) 
> > > may vary 
> > > > from the optimized sweet spot and still remain 
consistently 
> > > profitable. The 
> > > > one constant in the stock market is that it is 
not constant. For 
> >a 
> > > system to 
> > > > perform as expected going forward it seems to me 
that the system 
> > > must be 
> > > > flexible. Optimizing to such tight tolerances 
makes that goal 
> > > challenging. 
> > > > 
> > > > Jayson 
> > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > From: Fred [mailto:fctonetti@xxxx] 
> > > > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 12:44 PM 
> > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > Subject: Stock Selection was: [amibroker] Re: NDX 
/ QQQ - Can it 
> >be 
> > > traded ? 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Jayson, 
> > > > 
> > > > Using your example ... 
> > > > 
> > > > Wouldn't you consider it more appropriate to 
optimize in steps of 
> > > one 
> > > > and plot the results looking at the CAR & 
MDD's or some 
> >combination 
> > > > of those such as MAR = CAR / MDD and see where 
the most stable or 
> > > > robust area of MAR is for the parameters in play. 

> > > > 
> > > > For example lets assume that you first optimize 
by 25 and find the 
> > > > best MAR is at 100. 
> > > > 
> > > > And lets assume that you optimize again by 1 and 
find out the 
> >range 
> > > > between 81 and 101 is all pretty much the same 
but that at 74 the 
> > > CAR 
> > > > goes way down and at 102 the DD's go way up. Are 
you really 
> >going 
> > > to 
> > > > use 100 as the final value ? or the midpoint 
between 81 and 101 
> >i.e 
> > > > what I would consider to be the more robust 
setting. 
> > > > 
> > > > Fred 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Jayson" wrote: 

> > > > > Ken, 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Example: lets say one of your optimizations 
is the length of a 
> > > > given MA. If 
> > > > > your range is set from 20-200 with steps of 
1 then the 
> > > optimization 
> > > > will be 
> > > > > lengthy and what you will have accomplished 
is a tight curve 
> >fit 
> > > of 
> > > > the Ma 
> > > > > that historically worked on this basket over 
this time frame. 
> >The 
> > > > result may 
> > > > > very well not work as well in RT . On the 
other hand lets say 
> >you 
> > > > are 
> > > > > optimizing the same MA, 1-200 but instead of 
increments of 1 you 
> > > > use steps 
> > > > > of 25. This may offer a better 
representation since it does not 
> > > > necessarily 
> > > > > curve to fit 1 or a few very good trades but 
instead may 
> >capture a 
> > > > greater 
> > > > > percentage of good or bad trades..... 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jayson 
> > > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > > From: Ken Close [mailto:closeks@xxxx] 
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:55 AM 
> > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > Subject: RE: Stock Selection was: 
[amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - 
> >Can 
> > > > it be 
> > > > > traded ? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Well, I almost did not respond (although 
thanks for writing). 
> >I 
> > > am 
> > > > not 
> > > > > concerned with the price factors etc. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is the thing I am concerned with. I 
hear your other 
> >emphasis 
> > > > and am 
> > > > > taking care of that. The following is the 
area my previous post 
> > > > referred 
> > > > > to. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > "The challenge is to find a good range of 
settings with out 
> > > risking 
> > > > a curve 
> > > > > fit, other wise the system will not likely 
trade in the same 
> > > manner 
> > > > as it 
> > > > > tests." 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Any further comments on this one aspect of 
your reply??? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Anyone else??? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ken 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > > From: Jayson [mailto:jcasavant@xxxx] 
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:41 AM 
> > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > Subject: RE: Stock Selection was: 
[amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - 
> >Can 
> > > > it be 
> > > > > traded ? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Apples and Oranges Ken. Perhaps we can make 
a Nectarine! If you 
> > > > choose a 
> > > > > basket of stocks based on a given criteria 
then testing that 
> > > basket 
> > > > over 10 
> > > > > years may well hold no significance. Lets 
use a simple filter. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > C>10; 
> > > > > 
> > > > > ma(v,50)>100000; 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Lets consider that this is the criteria for 
our initial 
> > > > scan/selection. 
> > > > > Where were the conditions 1-2-5-10 years 
ago? If the conditions 
> > > > were not met 
> > > > > just 1 year ago would we have selected the 
stock for use in our 
> > > > system? If 
> > > > > not then what is the value of testing its 
results 2-5-10 years 
> > > ago? 
> > > > With 
> > > > > this approach you would need to test that 
the conditions were in 
> > > > fact met X 
> > > > > years ago then test forward using your 
selection criteria to 
> >exit 
> > > > when 
> > > > > necessary. This insures that you would not 
be testing stocks 
> >that 
> > > > in RT you 
> > > > > would have no intention of trading. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > You may wish to be careful with your 
Optimization. The 
> >challenge 
> > > is 
> > > > to find 
> > > > > a good range of settings with out risking a 
curve fit, other 
> >wise 
> > > > the system 
> > > > > will not likely trade in the same manner as 
it tests. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jayson 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > > From: Ken Close [mailto:closeks@xxxx] 
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:10 AM 
> > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > Subject: RE: Stock Selection was: 
[amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - 
> >Can 
> > > > it be 
> > > > > traded ? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jayson: your advice is very good as well as 
comprehensive..I am 
> > > > still left 
> > > > > unsettled as to my approach. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Lets say my indicator/system is relatively 
short term in nature 
> > > > (lookbacks 
> > > > > are somewhat short). But, I want to employ 
some of the 
> >principles 
> > > > that Fred 
> > > > > talked about namely to be sure I optimize 
over a long period so 
> > > > various 
> > > > > market conditions are captured). [I know the 
argument that the 
> > > > nature of 
> > > > > the market changed on 3/1/2000 and therefore 
optimizations 
> >should 
> > > > be done 
> > > > > after that point---I tend to want to be more 
conservative and 
> > > > capture 
> > > > > conditions on both sides of the peak]. Also, 
a system that 
> > > > optimizes to 
> > > > > good performance across that period seems a 
more conservative 
> > > > and "robust" 
> > > > > system. Witness Freds model of results in 
his "spectacular" 
> > > system- 
> > > > the 
> > > > > equity curve kept going up and was smooth as 
the system passed 
> > > over 
> > > > > 3/1/2000, 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > As I said previously, the optimization 
process is a lengthy 
> >one, 
> > > so 
> > > > my 
> > > > > approach is to do all of what you said below 
in other scans (I 
> > > pull 
> > > > out of 
> > > > > TC2000 many of the conditions you talk about 
below). This is my 
> > > > selection 
> > > > > watchlist. Then, I do not want to / can not 
take the time to 
> >run 
> > > > > optimizations on 300 or 800 stocks so I want 
a screening 
> >approach 
> > > > that has a 
> > > > > good probability of finding stocks that 
"resonate" with my 
> >system. 
> > > > Then, I 
> > > > > will optimize these stocks. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I still have to try DTs approach and 
probably alter it to 
> >conform 
> > > a 
> > > > little 
> > > > > more closely with my system. Another 
approach is that if I have 
> > > > for example 
> > > > > some trigger levels in my model...while 
these might optimize 
> >out 
> > > to 
> > > > extremes 
> > > > > for individual members (think about RSI 
crossing 30 and 70), 
> >then 
> > > my 
> > > > > screening formula might set a standard 
trigger of crossing 50 
> > > > either way. 
> > > > > Stocks that do "well" against the 50/50 
cross should do better 
> > > when 
> > > > > optimized to exact levels. Stocks that do 
poorly against the 
> > > 50/50 
> > > > cross 
> > > > > will still do poorly when optimized. Don't 
you think this is a 
> > > > correct way 
> > > > > of looking at it? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks for the help. Any further comments on 
the above point? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ken 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > > From: Jayson [mailto:jcasavant@xxxx] 
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:24 AM 
> > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > Subject: Stock Selection was: [amibroker] 
Re: NDX / QQQ - Can 
> >it 
> > > be 
> > > > traded ? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ken, 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I agree with Dimitris. To select a basket of 
stocks you must 
> >first 
> > > > select an 
> > > > > indicator or method/style to trade them 
with. If your 
> >System/style 
> > > > is trend 
> > > > > following then selecting a basket that 
trends strongly (up or 
> > > > down) is 
> > > > > critical. The indicators that you read that 
tend to behave for 
> > > > trending 
> > > > > conditions tend to fail miserably in 
consolidations. The 
> >reverse 
> > > is 
> > > > true for 
> > > > > Rolling stocks. You can use simple methods 
to begin the process 
> > > > such as 20 
> > > > > and 50 ma or slope of either. Many use a 
floor of price such as 
> > > > c>10 or 15 
> > > > > or whatever. Volume is certainly a major 
consideration since 
> > > without 
> > > > > liquidity the trade may be too challenging. 
Volatility is also 
> > > > something to 
> > > > > consider and to compare to your trading 
style. Do you (can you) 
> > > > stomach the 
> > > > > wild rides of stock like BEAS whose current 
ATR is >7% of the 
> > > > current price 
> > > > > (today moved nearly 8% on the open!!) or are 
you more 
> >comfortable 
> > > > trading in 
> > > > > the 3-5% range? Some like to add fundamental 
criteria. Though 
> >not 
> > > > easily 
> > > > > accomplished within AB there are data 
suppliers (QP and TC2000 
> >to 
> > > > name a 
> > > > > few) that make such an initial screen very 
easy. Add your own 
> > > > criteria to 
> > > > > pare down your initial universe to a more 
workable number. A 
> >lot 
> > > of 
> > > > my work 
> > > > > revolves around Sector Rotation. Determining 
where the money is 
> > > > flowing in 
> > > > > or out can help you to further refine your 
list. I think Ara is 
> > > > also working 
> > > > > in this area and may wish to add some of his 
thoughts. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > IMO this type of selection process offers 
insight into what is 
> > > most 
> > > > likely 
> > > > > to work in the short term. Testing a basket 
selection using this 
> > > > type of 
> > > > > approach over a long period (years) may not 
yield the desired 
> > > > results 
> > > > > because the above criteria is constantly in 
motion. However if 
> >you 
> > > > find that 
> > > > > your system or approach tends to work well 
under those 
> >conditions 
> > > > then 
> > > > > choosing stocks that meet a given criteria 
can yield impressive 
> > > > results. 
> > > > > Consider this a method of optimizing. 
Instead of optimizing the 
> > > > settings in 
> > > > > a group of indicators so that the results 
test well on a given 
> >set 
> > > > of 
> > > > > stocks, over a given time frame you are 
instead selecting a 
> >given 
> > > > universe 
> > > > > that tends to do well with a given set if 
indicators. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Regards, 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jayson 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > > From: DIMITRIS TSOKAKIS 
[mailto:TSOKAKIS@xxxx] 
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 5:50 AM 
> > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > Subject: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - Can it 
be traded ? 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ken, 
> > > > > I will try to describe an objective method I 
often use to select 
> > > > > stocks. 
> > > > > First of all it depends on the 
indicator/system you use [since I 
> > > > have 
> > > > > not yet any ...holy grail available] 
> > > > > Let us suppose you want to use the smoothed 
MeanRSI as a general 
> > > > > indicator and you want to find "good" 
applications. 
> > > > > The DEMA(MeanRSI,45) is a quite smooth and 
descriptive 
> >oscillator 
> > > > for 
> > > > > ^NDX market. 
> > > > > If you could buy at troughs and sell at 
peaks [with some zig 
> > > period 
> > > > > around 20] you would have one of the best 
> > > > > performances for this Market indicator. Does 
it suites to ANY 
> > > stock? 
> > > > > Certainly not. 
> > > > > Run the 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
f=Foreign("~SUMRSI","C")/Foreign("~COUNT","V");F=DEMA 
> >(F,45);z=20; 
> > > > > Buy=TroughBars(f,z)==0;Sell=PeakBars(f,z) 
> >==0;Short=Sell;Cover=Buy; 
> > > > > 
> > > > > from, say, May1, 2000 till now and see the 
top gainers [NTAP, 
> > > JNPR, 
> > > > > CIEN etc] and the top loosers [FHCC, PDCO, 
ESRX etc] 
> > > > > Since Peak/Trough system is, as you know, 
unrealistic, try to 
> > > > replace 
> > > > > it with a closest approximation. 
> > > > > For smoothed oscillators a 2-level system is 
really interesting. 
> > > > > Try something like 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
f=Foreign("~SUMRSI","C")/Foreign("~COUNT","V"); 
> > > > > X=45;//Optimize("X",45,35,50,5); 
> > > > > F=DEMA(F,X); 
> > > > > x1=Optimize("X1",42,38,44,1);//buy level 
> > > > > x2=Optimize("X2",56,55,60,1);//sell level 
> > > > > b1=Cross(f,x1);b2=Cross(x1,f);//no need to 
be fanatic with the 
> > > type 
> > > > > of cross, the system knows better 
> > > > > s1=Cross(f,x2);s2=Cross(x2,f); 
> > > > > nb=Optimize("nb",1,1,2,1); 
> > > > > ns=Optimize("ns",1,1,2,1); 
> > > > > nSH=Optimize("nSH",1,1,2,1); 
> > > > > nCO=Optimize("nCO",2,1,2,1); 
> > > > > Buy=IIf(nb==1,b1,b2);Sell=IIf(ns==1,s1,s2); 
> > > > > Buy=ExRem(Buy,Sell);Sell=ExRem(Sell,Buy); 
> > > > > 
Short=IIf(nSH==1,s1,s2);Cover=IIf(nCO==1,b1,b2); 
> > > > > 
Short=ExRem(Short,Cover);Cover=ExRem(Cover,Short 
> > > > > 
> > > > > The good performance of JNPR in the 
theoretical Peak/Trough 
> > > project 
> > > > > [around +1000% with 4/4/0 success] 
> > > > > leaves room for good optimization results 
> > > > > [sometimes better than the "ideal" model: 
there are MANY 
> > > > combinations 
> > > > > better than +1000% for JNPR] 
> > > > > The bad performance of ESRX means that this 
stock need some 
> >other 
> > > > > treatment. 
> > > > > The same optimization confirms the ESRX 
conclusion : It is 
> >better 
> > > > not 
> > > > > to trade this stock, since the most 
profitable combination 
> > > > > is the 0 trades ! 
> > > > > Of course, this method is not always 
accurate, but it gives good 
> > > > > advices for the first selection. 
> > > > > Besides that, I have met many times JNPR and 
RFMD in the 4-digit 
> > > > > profitable stocks, my experience is not 
great, I come back to 
> > > basics 
> > > > > [CSCO 70% and BEAS 30%] quickly, I feel more 
safe there, but, 
> >it 
> > > is 
> > > > a 
> > > > > matter of taste [crude oil and copper 
futures are also 
> > > interesting, 
> > > > > but let us talk for stocks in this group] 
> > > > > Does it help ? 
> > > > > Dimitris 
> > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Ken 
Close" 
> > > wrote: 
> > > > > > DT: can you name some additional 
symbols, besides CSCO and 
> >BEAS, 
> > > > > with 
> > > > > > which you have seen similar success. 
Thanks for sharing your 
> > > > > > experience. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Ken 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > > > From: DIMITRIS TSOKAKIS 
[mailto:TSOKAKIS@xxxx] 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 3:38 
AM 
> > > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > > Subject: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ - 
Can it be traded ? 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Herman, 
> > > > > > An annual system % return 100%-120% is 
reasonable for many QQQ 
> > > > > > systems from Jan2000 till now. 
> > > > > > [Suppose always buy, sell, short, cover 
at +1Open, 0.5% 
> > > commission 
> > > > > > and disabled stops] 
> > > > > > I would be surprised indeed to see a 
double return. 
> > > > > > Above 200%-250% we may find some other 
popular stocks, but 
> >not 
> > > > > QQQ, 
> > > > > > AFAIK. 
> > > > > > I come to believe there are some 
"functional" limitations for 
> > > QQQ 
> > > > > > curve to exceed the annual 150%. 
> > > > > > This conclusion is after MANY tests for 
various trading 
> >systems, 
> > > > > > optimised or not. 
> > > > > > This is a reason I prefer CSCO or BEAS 
for example, their 
> >curves 
> > > > > are 
> > > > > > more "profitable" and more flexible. 
> > > > > > Of course I [almost] always speak for 
medium speed systems 
> >[not 
> > > > > more 
> > > > > > than 6 trades per year] 
> > > > > > It is more than 8 months I did not 
trade a single QQQ share, I 
> > > > > would 
> > > > > > be glad to come back to my old 
favorite, but for a better than 
> > > > 180% 
> > > > > > annual return. 
> > > > > > This is my experience, I hope it hepls 
somehow... 
> > > > > > Dimitris 
> > > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 
"Herman van den Bergen" 
> > > > > > wrote: 
> > > > > > > Well Fred, the real values to use 
when estimating whether a 
> > > > > trading 
> > > > > > system 
> > > > > > > is practical have never been 
answered on this list. You are 
> >a 
> > > > > > trader, I am 
> > > > > > > still mostly a tinkerer, so I 
respect your opinion. As a 
> >rule 
> > > I 
> > > > > > discard 
> > > > > > > systems that do not survive my 
"acid test" of 0.5%. This 
> > > allows 
> > > > > my 
> > > > > > to fumble 
> > > > > > > placing the trade, allows for some 
over-optimization, 
> > > slippage, 
> > > > > > slow data, 
> > > > > > > and even for some commission. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > There ought to be a formula based 
on parameters like volume, 
> > > > > > volatility and 
> > > > > > > price, to gives us a working 
estimate. Places that have 
> >lots 
> > > of 
> > > > > > trading 
> > > > > > > histories could crunch that out in 
seconds. Would be 
> > > interesting 
> > > > > to 
> > > > > > have a 
> > > > > > > poll on this. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Herman. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > -----Original Message----- 
> > > > > > > From: Fred [mailto:fctonetti@xxxx] 

> > > > > > > Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 
4:03 PM 
> > > > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > > > Subject: [amibroker] Re: NDX / QQQ 
- Can it be traded ? 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Herman, 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Let's use today as an example and 
assume you are going to 
> > > > trade 
> > > > > > QQQ 
> > > > > > > after you make a decision on where 
NDX closes ... 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > At 4:00 PM QQQ was as at 24.50 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Between there and 4:15 QQQ got as 
high as 24.54 and as 
> >low 
> > > as 
> > > > > > 24.48 
> > > > > > > or 0.16% over and 0.08% under as 
EXTREMES. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Thomas, 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I'm not quite ready to toss it on 
the scrap heap yet. I 
> > > just 
> > > > > > started 
> > > > > > > playing with it. 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> > > > > > > ADVERTISEMENT 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages 
ONLY to: 
> > > > amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > > > (Web page: 
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is 
subject to the Yahoo! Terms 
> >of 
> > > > > > Service. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: 

> >amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > > (Web page: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 

> > > > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: 
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > (Web page: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
Yahoo! Terms of 
> > > Service. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: 
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > (Web page: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
Yahoo! Terms of 
> > > Service. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: 
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > (Web page: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
Yahoo! Terms of 
> > > Service. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: 
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > (Web page: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
Yahoo! Terms of 
> > > Service. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> > > > > ADVERTISEMENT 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: 
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > > (Web page: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
Yahoo! Terms of 
> > > Service. 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> > > > ADVERTISEMENT 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: 
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > > > (Web page: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> > > > 
> > > > Check group FAQ at: 
> > > > 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> > > > 
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
Yahoo! Terms of 
> >Service. 
> > 
> 
> 
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

>---- 
>MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* 
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ADVERTISEMENT 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>(Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/) 
> 
>Check group FAQ at: 
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> 
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service. 
> 


MSN 8 helps ELIMINATE E-MAIL 
VIRUSES. Get 2 months FREE*. Post 
AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Web page: <A 
href="">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)Check 
group FAQ at: <A 
href="">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A 
href="">Yahoo! Terms of Service. 







Yahoo! Groups Sponsor


  ADVERTISEMENT









Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
(Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)

Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.