Stock Picking (Beat Boho) Contest - V2.0

[exnavynuke]

There's nothing about my current strategy that would tend to make my few losses larger than my 89% gains. That's what happened but it's less likely to happen now. There was a time when I had more serious liquidation issues from doubling down but I don't do that any more. At least not as often.

I'm Currently holding a big loser that I bought because I wasn't being careful. IRL, I'd be somewhat more careful. I don't want to make excuses so I won't say I'm certain I wouldn't have bought it IRL but I immediately had second thoughts and did more research (I think I tried Yahoo news instead of just Google and Fidelity) and I quickly found what I was afraid if. The cause of the drop was more serious than I had previously read. The order wasn't yet filled, I thought I could cancel, but I couldn't.

The above is different from something like a betting on red scenario.

As I mentioned before, you're largest problem is having no defined risk:reward strategy that anyone can possibly discern. If you're willing to wait until you have a 25% loss, you should be EXPECTING a gain at least double that much over in order to be operating under any "risk:reward" ratio I've ever heard of a successful trader using. Your "risk" tolerance, however, has been summed up as "whatever" and your "expected" gain seems to be "some", meaning you'll sell for a % gain a lot less than you'll sell a % loss on the same trade. Being willing to lose more than you think you'll gain if things go your way means that over time you will almost always lose out when your losers eat all your gains and then some (as has happened to you for the past year).

Until you change your trading style to control risk, you'll be net negative in the long run, even if you get lucky and go positive over any given time-frame. That's just how statistics work. In a more traditional market (with lower percentage "winners") you'd likely be doing much worse honestly.

 

[braumeister]

That's just how statistics work. In a more traditional market (with lower percentage "winners") you'd likely be doing much worse honestly.

All very true. But the sad fact is that most people simply don't understand statistics. One of the big reasons why reporters create misleading headlines from scientific studies.

In my freshman year of college, I was very lucky to take a course called "Finite Math" that was mostly probability and basic statistics. The introduction to probability really opened my eyes and I have benefited enormously from it ever since.

Simple example that always stuck with me:
How many people do you need in a room for there to be a better than even chance that two of them have the same birthday?
The answer is 23. With 50 people, the odds are better than 90%.
Not at all obvious without a basic understanding of the math.

 

[Boho]

As I mentioned before, you're largest problem is having no defined risk:reward strategy that anyone can possibly discern. If you're willing to wait until you have a 25% loss, you should be EXPECTING a gain at least double that much over in order to be operating under any "risk:reward" ratio I've ever heard of a successful trader using.

That's not statistics. That's just saying that the successful traders you've heard of all expect at least 2x more monetary gains than losses. You don't need that ratio to be ahead.

Your "risk" tolerance, however, has been summed up as "whatever"

Wrong

and your "expected" gain seems to be "some"

Wrong

meaning you'll sell for a % gain a lot less than you'll sell a % loss on the same trade...

You probably mean I don't sell for as high a percentage of the buy price as the percentage lost when I sell. That's probably true. I try to make up for it in numbers - 89% winning trades. You need to know particulars about how much I lose when I lose and how much I gain when I win before you can show that what I'm doing doesn't work statistically. You're better off just saying "it's not working."

 

[ERD50]

.... You're better off just saying "it's not working."

OK. "It's not working". But we already knew that.

There's nothing about my current strategy that would tend to make my few losses ....

The above is different from something like a betting on red scenario.

Yes, very different. As exnavynuke is pointing out, there is a defined risk/reward in betting red. I really don't think you have any defined risk/reward, it appears to be just jumping from one shiny object to another, based on your "research", which seems to be mostly gleaned from widely available info from Yahoo news or Google or Fidelity.

-ERD50

 

[Boho]

I'll tell you something about Dollar Tree...I just ordered my third thing from them and it's the third time they told me it's ready for pickup and it wasn't there. Last time it never showed up. Their online ordering isn't working out and whoever had expectations about it being good is wrong. I don't know how to short stock off hand but I might short it.

 

[imp4]

I'll tell you something about Dollar Tree...I just ordered my third thing from them and it's the third time they told me it's ready for pickup and it wasn't there. Last time it never showed up. Their online ordering isn't working out and whoever had expectations about it being good is wrong. I don't know how to short stock off hand but I might short it.

It's a dollar store....

 

[Boho]

Want to sell ANFI and I can't even sell 6000 shares when the volume is 106,501. Show Max says 0 just like SYPR, which I also want to sell.

 

[exnavynuke]

That's not statistics. That's just saying that the successful traders you've heard of all expect at least 2x more monetary gains than losses. You don't need that ratio to be ahead.



Wrong



Wrong



You probably mean I don't sell for as high a percentage of the buy price as the percentage lost when I sell. That's probably true. I try to make up for it in numbers - 89% winning trades. You need to know particulars about how much I lose when I lose and how much I gain when I win before you can show that what I'm doing doesn't work statistically. You're better off just saying "it's not working."

Rephrase everything I said with "based on what you've said and done since you've been on this forum, everything appears to:" and it's all correct (even if you don't "get it").

Math doesn't lie, and being willing to "lose it all" (apparently) while only taking small gains is a statistical recipe for losing (like you've been doing). You don't have to like it, but that's how math works. Being right for 1-5% 89 times and being wrong for 30,50,75,100% 11 times results in a huge loss. That's simple math. I could draw a picture for you, but I'm not that invested in showing you how that works. That you don't get that, and thus haven't bothered learning to implement risk controls in your trading is one of the many reasons why your picking is going to lose pretty much every time. Your "strategy" is massively flawed because of your incorrect belief that being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times. That's just not how math works, sorry.

 

[Boho]

Rephrase everything I said with "based on what you've said and done since you've been on this forum, everything appears to:" and it's all correct (even if you don't "get it").

Math doesn't lie, and being willing to "lose it all" (apparently) while only taking small gains is a statistical recipe for losing (like you've been doing). You don't have to like it, but that's how math works. Being right for 1-5% 89 times and being wrong for 30,50,75,100% 11 times results in a huge loss. That's simple math. I could draw a picture for you, but I'm not that invested in showing you how that works. That you don't get that, and thus haven't bothered learning to implement risk controls in your trading is one of the many reasons why your picking is going to lose pretty much every time. Your "strategy" is massively flawed because of your incorrect belief that being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times. That's just not how math works, sorry.

I day trade and I've been selling for between 1/4% and 1/2% gain, usually within a day or two. I don't know what my average loss was. We just know that I'm not one of the leaders any more (I was for months but people seem to forget that). I'm not in the red either though. I don't think I suffered any 70 or 100% loss. I don't think "being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times" but it could happen.

 

[exnavynuke]

I day trade and I've been selling for between 1/4% and 1/2% gain, usually within a day or two. I don't know what my average loss was. We just know that I'm not one of the leaders any more (I was for months but people seem to forget that). I'm not in the red either though. I don't think I suffered any 70 or 100% loss. I don't think "being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times" but it could happen.

No one cares that you were the leader for a short period of time long ago because it's irrelevant. For a much longer period of time than that, you were in the red despite a bull market happening for most of that period. When you're busy trying to convince yourself you're doing great, try to look at all the ways it can be seen that you're not actually doing great. Not recognizing and trying to correct errors in your strategy (whether stock picking or life in general) is not a path to success usually.

 

[Boho]

For a much longer period of time than that, you were in the red

That hasn't been established, and when I posted some details about how many months I was number 1 someone made a mockery of it.

Not recognizing and trying to correct errors in your strategy (whether stock picking or life in general) is not a path to success usually.

I corrected a couple. I was criticized for that too.

 

[sengsational]

I just tried to sell SYPR and it failed. Then I clicked "Show max" and saw "A maximum of 0 shares can be bought due to the game's minimum share price setting."

The rules of the game, which are flexible when the game is created, have a 10% volume limit. You've already sold 3640 shares today. You are up against the 10% volume per day limitation.

Want to sell ANFI and I can't even sell 6000 shares when the volume is 106,501. Show Max says 0 just like SYPR, which I also want to sell.

You should be able to buy or sell 10650 shares in one day, based on that volume. You've already sold 10399 shares today. You are up against the 10% volume per day limitation.

 

[Boho]

Fascinating! 4% is the best of 100 trades?

I think the "best" column lists the highest dollar amount regardless of percent. I buy big sometimes and 4% could be a lot.

Currently I have SYPR with a total gain of 10.56%. I don't know whether that's a record for me.

 

[ERD50]

No one cares that you were the leader for a short period of time long ago because it's irrelevant. For a much longer period of time than that, you were in the red ....

Not only in the red, but even further behind our Total Market B&H reference point nunnun.

If a 'strategy' can't easily and consistently beat doing nothing at all, what's the point?

-ERD50

 

[Boho]

If a 'strategy' can't easily and consistently beat doing nothing at all, what's the point?

To make more money. I don't need easy and I wish people would stop using "consistently" because I don't even know what you mean by it.

 

[imp4]

To make more money. I don't need easy and I wish people would stop using "consistently" because I don't even know what you mean by it.

Consistently means often enough AND of high enough value to beat the benchmark.

 

[ERD50]

To make more money. I don't need easy and I wish people would stop using "consistently" because I don't even know what you mean by it.

Well, a few months out of a year ain't it.

No, you don't need 'easy', if there was something to show for the effort. But putting a bunch more work, and lagging just isn't attractive.

-ERD50

 

[Boho]

Still trying to sell.

 

[Boho]

And

 

[exnavynuke]

Volume rule is "per day", not "per transaction".

You've already traded a bunch of those earlier in the day, reducing what's available now.

 

[sengsational]

You have sold 2160 SYPR and 4816 ANFI so far today.

Like I said yesterday, it's about how many you sell in one day, not for each transaction.

EDIT:
SYPR volume is now 28,394. You can sell another 679 shares.
ANFI volume is now 53,850. You can sell another 569 shares.

 

[Boho]

Oh, per day. OK. I'm done selling SYPR. Still working on ANFI.

 

[sengsational]

I'm still working on selling IRMD. Average volume is around 20,000, but it's been only allowing me to sell in the 500 range, and I started with 4300 shares.

I'm going to chat with the people from investopedia about the simulator (I put my email address into the survey thing that's been popping up).

I plan to suggest that they 1) use a rolling volume, so that you get the volume for last 24 hours of trading, not the volume that starts at zero every day, and/or 2) you can put in a market order for closing that's the max volume for the day.

Another topic is that of the Fermion1 short sale that gave the player "free money" when the stock was de-listed.

And a final topic where clicking someone else's "corporate action" link takes you to your own (thereby making the corporate action of other players unavailable).

If anyone else wants me to address topics concerning the simulator, let me know. If you can school me in your concern/observation, I'll try to bring that topic up on the call.

 

[Totoro]

add more stocks (international ones).

 

[easysurfer]

Bet I can't do this again ... Down only $2.38 for the day .