Arbitrage - page 6
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
SK, I think you have got the idea wrong.
In any case, time will judge.
"The lord will come and judge us..."
I just don't know the right words to use sometimes.
The only thing I know for sure, it's not about pipsing on a temporary unbalanced course.
P.S. Oops, while I was answering, the Barin came, but he too seems to have a problem expressing his thoughts. Or he just doesn't want to reveal them to us.
Based on the tester chart, the following characteristic can be observed. Equity NEVER exceeds the balance. This allows us to conclude that equity in other currencies from another hedge (according to the author's recommendations, hedges may be used for other currencies as well) will also be sufficiently higher than the current balance (or for example allocated for this hedge). Thus, I have an assumption that if instead of a hedge indicated in the first post for EUR you will apply the aggregate of currency pairs for other currencies as well, the size of the initial balance should be at least increased to be able to hold the indicated time of 2 years. That is, if you have 2 different hedging organizations, then the initial balance should be, say, the root of 2 times more if the currencies are uncorrelated, 3 - the root of 3 times more if the currencies are uncorrelated, etc.
The tester's chart looks like a strategy with extremely skewed profit and loss shoulders, in other words "if only the deposit would be enough to survive a drawdown"...
Actually, the author would be very kind to present similar tests for hedges with other currencies. I think everyone will be interested to see them.
Maybe in a previous life you asked such a question? Because I have not noticed it in the previous posts of this thread.
If you insist, I can tell you a terrible secret. But please do not tell it to anybody else, otherwise everyone will know. To foolish traders could not get to the truth, they sent a Cossack in Dow Jones, who said that the market is allegedly always right. Since then, the fools think so and repeat it. But the truth is that no matter where the market goes, it always makes an error regarding a trader, and it is always wrong. If quotations go down, the trader has an opportunity to buy cheap. If the quotations go up, the trader can sell triple price. Some people have already guessed how to turn this top-secret knowledge into a source of income. The rest are still asking questions with foul language.
The question in question is here 'Trading strategy for essential stock arbitrage' from 04.05.2006 18:08.
There are other questions there as well, e.g. what is the account's trading history relevant?
to solandr
In this system equity cannot exceed the balance by definition! The system is counter-trend, which means that positions are opened against the movement, which in turn means that there is always an open position with floating minus. Well, the floating minus should be hedged with other instruments.
The only two things that are not clear to me about this system are:
1. at what interval to open or according to what formula;
2. If I buy a certain amount of euros for quid (for example), then we sell only this amount for a third currency (if there is an appropriate signal), or we can sell as long as the signals are present?
Well, it is the floating minus that needs to be hedged on other instruments.
This shows the maximum drawdown of equity of about 80% of the initial deposit. At the same time we see the balance profit of about 30%. Thus, we need exactly 50% of the deposit to have absolute zero (initial deposit) in case we decide to close the whole trading session drastically, but we want to exit without losing any part of the initial deposit. That is, taking the ideal case that we have other hedge set on other currencies, whose equity coincides with the same rising line of the balance, we obtain that we need to have at least 2 more such hedge set (we will ideally have 60% of profit on balance on them).
That is, just try to imagine it. In an ideal case, in order to hedge the equity drawdown of 80% on one currency hedge, you would have another 2 separate hedge sets with corresponding values of the deposit! In real life, of course, the depo amounts allocated to other hedges will have to increase even more! In general, the only way the securities market can survive a considerable drawdown without stops.
And here we are going to play completely on trader's nerves, and most importantly, on investor's nerves.
SK, I think you have got the idea wrong.
In any case, time will tell.
"The lord will come and judge us..."
I just sometimes don't know what words to use to express my point properly.
One thing I know for sure, it's not about pipsing on a temporary imbalance of rates.
P.S. Oops, while I was answering, the Barin came, but he too seems to have a problem expressing his thoughts. Or he just doesn't want to reveal them to us.
About expressing thought correctly - it should be understood to mean that difficulties arise in cases of unjustified and emotional confrontation on the part of opponents. In that case I really get lost. When you say self-evident things and they are not perceived, you get confused.
It is all about protecting beginners' deposits from unjustified losses.
I have stated my arguments clearly enough, they are obvious to me.
If they are not obvious to someone, then there are 2 ways:
- try to investigate what is the point (I emphasize, investigate, but not believe in some authority);
- use this technology for real trading.
The first way seems to me more effective.
The second is somewhat faster, but a little more expensive.
to solandr
While one part of the positions will give a loss (temporary!, because we expect the price to reverse), the other part of the positions should give a profit, which we will lock in (not temporary!). And it is not absolutely necessary (but good) that profitable trades will constantly overlap unprofitable ones, there will be times when floating losses will "hang" in the deposit. That is why the condition of its large size is set.
In general, I do not understand why any topic on any forum receives a storm of criticism? I'm not saying that this TS is working, I'm just suggesting. I follow this thread because I believe in it, and because I hope the author will answer some of my questions, to which I myself could not yet find the answers. But why waste time for those who are sure that this TS does not work?
Actually questions I asked and if Mr Reshetov on them at their next appearance in this thread will not answer, then he will not answer them ever (for his own reasons) and I can with clear conscience leave this thread. I will just have to spend a little (a lot) more time searching for the answers to those questions.
to solandr
In general I do not understand, gentlemen, why any topic in any forum is subjected to a storm of criticism?
In general, that is what forums are for discussion. If a person is not interested in someone else's opinion on any subject, what is the point of informing on the forum, opening new threads? Moreover, what you call "a storm of criticism" in this thread - this is just some general conclusions on the data presented. If the system has problems already on general observations, a "storm of criticism" probably will not even follow.
By the way, here is an immodest question. According to this pagehttp://reshetov.xnet.uz/arbitrage.html
**************
Information on the principles of its operation is not subject to distribution.
Demo accounts in the future will not be supported by the system.
Who is not in time is too late.
Comment
****************************************
What is the point of posting on the public view the Expert Advisor that some craftsmen could decompile, if the system "was sold with the copyrights and the information on its principles are not subject to distribution"? I am asking just out of curiosity. There is no need to answer it.
I've decided not to ask it yet, but since it's been asked, I'll join in.