10M USD Reference Portfolio

I've added a tabular presentation of the portfolio with all details for each position.
Best luck to your trading.
 
Updated as usual. Quite some change(s) this week. Getting lighter...
Best luck.
 
Major move on the 14th as explained. The portfolio is now flat.
Explainations given on the site.
Best lucK.
 
Portfolio remains flat this week, invested in the MM.
Cheers.
 
Back to business this week, the system has re-taken some positions.
Best luck.
 
Well, the system has been whipsawed and I explain on the blog what happened.
Better days ahead !
Cheers.
 
Updated on March the 17th.
Portfolio's flat.
SSEC turning BULL.
Cheers.
 
I just got around to looking at this. This is too much like work. Is this something that should be reported to a moderator?
 
Soon2B said:
I just got around to looking at this. This is too much like work. Is this something that should be reported to a moderator?
Delawaredave said:
I agree.   This is an annoying thread that should be closed.
If we're gonna delete threads that remind people of the workplace or are just annoying, then we're gonna need a lot more moderators to keep up with the, er, work. And at least three posters would have to leave the board!

Did you two not notice that this has been going on for the last three months, or did it take that long to make up your minds?

You're the first two official public complaints we've had among the 2200+ posters, but we'll take it up again amongst ourselves & with Dory.

We moderators discussed it a bit last week and consensus was to let it be. My vote is that Poyet has had the tacit support of all the moderators (as well as my active support) and his behavior hasn't crossed any lines. I haven't seen anything to change my opinion, but I'm just one minority voter.
 
My apologies! I don't think this is out of line. I'm just questioning "why?" I didn't look at it closely enough to see if he's selling something. If so, that's another issue. I did see that it has been going on for a long time. That was really my point. So, what is the point of this thread?

Don't kill it on my account. Someone might really care about this thread. I don't and won't make the mistake again. I don't invest this way but I certainly have more offensive personal habits others might object to.
 
Soon2B said:
My apologies! I don't think this is out of line. I'm just questioning "why?" I didn't look at it closely enough to see if he's selling something. If so, that's another issue. I did see that it has been going on for a long time. That was really my point. So, what is the point of this thread?

Don't kill it on my account. Someone might really care about this thread. I don't and won't make the mistake again. I don't invest this way but I certainly have more offensive personal habits others might object to.

No, Soon2B, I'm not selling anything apart ideas which I've not been very successful at given the little feedback I've had so far !

The objective of the thread was to foster discussions on the issue of trading automation and the design of automated trading systems, the development of which has not been work for me but a great and enjoyable intellectual and technical challenge.

The question is: are there means to develop programmes able to trade on their own with consistent success over long period of time, mastering all aspects of trading including selecting positions, timing, money management, risk, etc. ? The four years of efforts I've put in this endeavour let me think that I can answer YES, though there are certainly many other approaches and means to make such systems work and I would like to ear people feedback if any on that.

The blog will keep running and I agree that without feedback on this thread I would have shifted to a monthly update on the board and eventually let the thread die, though I would not have liked people to interpret that as a system's failure. In any case it would at least be a failure to get people interest !

Anyway, I'd like to thank the board owner and moderators for being openminded with my attempt to kick in a discussion on that matter. I will not abuse their kindness. If the thread does not take off I'll let it move way down in the pile...
 
Nords said:
Did you two not notice that this has been going on for the last three months, or did it take that long to make up your minds?

You're the first two official public complaints we've had among the 2200+ posters, but we'll take it up again amongst ourselves & with Dory. 

I've seen the posts for three months - I just don't understand why updates have to be posted weekly here forever. The update posts don't seem to be generating much relevant dialog.

After introducing the program, anyone interested can simply bookmark the blog and go there directly. 

But I really don't care - I don't wanna tick anyone off - thanks.
 
Delawaredave said:
I've seen the posts for three months - I just don't understand why updates have to be posted weekly here forever. The update posts don't seem to be generating much relevant dialog.

You're right Delawaredave, if it does not generate dialog, I'll stop posting !
 
I, for one, enjoy checking in on it from time to time. I am skeptical that the automated trading system will be able to produce a higher risk-adjusted return than any old slice and dice buy-n-hold type of portfolio over a meaningful length of time. But it is an interesting experiment nonetheless.

Advice to those who find this thread annoying or a waste of time when it gets updated once a week: DON'T CLICK ON THE LINK!!!! Or if you click it by accident, and decide "Oh, this is that stupid thread about stupid pointless stuff", then hit "back" on your browser, and continue surfing.
 
I hadnt read the thread in a while as I had put it in the bucket of "another thread about automated trading that will be posted to until the system craters because those dont work over long periods of time".

I did wish from time to time that I could 'unsubscribe' from the thread and not see any 'new' updates when I looked at 'see threads with new stuff in them', but as justin says, its pretty easy to ignore.

Heck, if *I* wont complain about it, its pretty low level.

However the petty squabbling about it is kinda fun to read, so uhhh...thanks for that...I think ;)
 
I had a personal exchange with Nords about what the system does, but not going into any details as it is not what is requested or addressed by the two previous posters and staying on the surface at the psychological level, it's funny to see how people are generally skeptical about trading automation.

I guess the primary frustration comes from the fact that nobody can envisage that a "stupid machine" could do better something that we humans have so many difficulties achieving. So people state that it blows over time (my experience is that it happens but to human traders more than to machines !), or that it does not work, or... etc. Everybody knows that trading is difficult so how could a machine be more clever than us :confused: It is both our failures (let me know of anyone who has traded and has never failed) and our competitive positioning with the system that makes us defiant.

But, acknowledge the truth. Experiments have been made with groups and PhDs do not succeed better than others (I know that for sure !). Successful trading has nothing to do with intelligence per se, and there are many psychological factors that make most human being fail with trading (many books address the issue). Many traders when you tell them "but the heck why did you do that !" say "yes I know, I knew I should not have done it, but it was compulsive, I did it !", kind of self punitive.

So the rules are well known. They can be put black on white. Not blowing an account on margin is just an equation, etc. A specification can be written of a system which does not infringe the rules that he knows it has to follow. And though not being the best trader on earth, consistency over time makes that automated trader beat most (99% ?) human traders over long period of time as it is - if manually done - a lot of work everyday, and we all have good and bad days, which the machine has not !

It's funny to see computers and AI programmes embarked in sophisticated systems and controlling many of our daily lives experiences, like trusting the aeroplane navigation system, the surgeon electronic devices, etc. We are all confident, but as soon as it is trading, everybody expects the system to crash !!!!

Planes take off, fly and land on their own if necessary. And nobody would expect them to crash ! Trading is not that complicated but is so much emotionally loaded as we talk about money !!!

Trading automation is like printing notes. Cannot work !

Well two cents to foster a bit ideas.
 
Unfortunately short to intermediate term trading is influenced far more by individual and group psychology than by any numbers or measurements. Certainly the numbers and measurements influence the groupthink that runs the markets day to day. But those reactions are unpredictable.

Over long periods of time, the markets do march to the tune of earnings and growth. But modest or frequent trading based on trying to determine or predict the results of individual investors due to certain levels or events simply doesnt work or doesnt work over long periods of time unless your name is Buffett and you buy whole companies at a pop.

At least not up until now. Maybe this is different. Maybe you can divine the directions of the trading public.

Do keep reporting in, and be sure to give the full post-mortem if it crashes and burns.

By the way, what algorithm divines the upside down tendency for people to want to buy a stock when the market is up and sell it when the market is down? Or sell when numbers are good and buy when they're bad. Or the reverse for no apparent reason?
 
Cute 'n' Fuzzy Bunny said:
At least not up until now. Maybe this is different. Maybe you can divine the directions of the trading public.

Do keep reporting in, and be sure to give the full post-mortem if it crashes and burns.

By the way, what algorithm divines the upside down tendency for people to want to buy a stock when the market is up and sell it when the market is down? Or sell when numbers are good and buy when they're bad. Or the reverse for no apparent reason?

The tape is all and the system does not divine anything. In fact, a chart (or its internal representation) of a stock, index, whatever is though of by the system in physical terms, say as if we were making some kind of target motion analysis. Of course, we need to smooth the trajectory in different ways and at different time scale, before computing on these representations rate of change, derivates, etc. But in the end, it either goes up or down ! And the system tries to be as simple as that. If the index chosen (either custom to the trading universe or standard like NDX) goes up and most stocks in the trading universe do so, the system has a long stance and reversely. Then, if long and if the market accelerates, it tries to find stocks which motion is the fastest, etc. Then it goes to money management and risk to check how much it can go shopping for, etc. Given the speed of the trajectory (and volatility) the system will protect by slower or faster stops... and the NAV of the account is reflexively looked at as a security (and its trajectory monitored) with stops against the NAV...

An extremely short summary...
 
Ah...in short laymans terms, momentum trading.

Which works great until the momentum stops. Or (I believe it was Alec's term) the markets get drunk and do stupid things.
 
Cute 'n' Fuzzy Bunny said:
Ah...in short laymans terms, momentum trading.
Well, the computer's too smart to read analyst's reports. What else could it work with?

The biggest flaw in momentum trading is... the human doing the trading.

Besides Poyet is the only other guy I've met on this board who knows LISP.
 
Spanky said:
I used to develop expert systems in Lisp (back in the 80s).
Ever notice that no one ever develops incompetent systems? Not intentionally, anyway...

Cute 'n' Fuzzy Bunny said:
I used to sell Alpha Microsystems running AMOS and LISP back in the 70's...
I guess we should be thankful that the military didn't adopt it as a MILSPEC.
 
Back
Top Bottom