SpearPointTrader

I actually use the 18 bar SMA for mine. Seems to be more reliable, due to the fact that he 18 day moving average is more widely used. I feel it is like trading a market. You always pick the month with the highest OI and Volume, because the signals are the most accurate due to the traffic trading that contract. The more people trading off of a signal, the more accurate an entry based off of it will be. DISCLAIMER: THE PRECEDING POST IS STRICTLY HYPOTHETICAL IN NATURE, FOR THE PURPOSES OF EDUCATION AND DISCUSSION *ONLY*. IT IS NOT DESIGNED TO PROVIDE ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVICE. THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING FUTURES AND OPTIONS ON COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THEY MAY NOT BE SUITABLE FOR ALL INVESTORS. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

One of the benefits with a black box running the managed futures account for the broker, is that the client does not even need an internet connection. Their account is run by the box on the broker's side. It's completely hands free for the client. Futures & Commodities trading is High Risk due to highly leverage markets. THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

I don't really have a point into user's profitability, so far as Zulutrade goes. Just commenting that true black boxes work very well. The firm I work for runs the managed futures accounts with them. As for trying Zulu, no, I have not tried it. I do have an account, however it is a self directed account that uses QST as the user interface/charting platform. As for my comments, I am mostly just chit chatting back and forth here. Futures & Commodities trading is High Risk due to highly leverage markets. THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

You have that with black boxes as well. All of that is the same. It has to be published as the trading record of the CTA overseeing the black box.

Maybe I am reading this all wrong, but to me "Auto Trading" is like a black box. You plug it in, and it does all the trading for you. It enters, sets stops and targets, and exits all on it's own. The brokerage I work at uses these successfully to run the managed futures program. We don't do anything but plug the client's account into the system, and it day trades on it's own, completely autonomously. Futures & Commodities trading is High Risk due to highly leverage markets. THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

Well, because if you don't have a tested, prove system, and you just jump in with real money you are far more likely to lose everything you have trying to develop a system, than not. Back testing works. However, that said one needs to understand the context. For example, back testing, especially in manual systems, cannot test the entry on an evolving bar. If you have a trading idea, you need to understand the progression. 1. come up with an idea. 2. Back test it. 3. Now, *IF* it is working in back testing, the next step is to use a simulated account with real time data to test it over time in simulation. 4. If you are successful over the majority of the most common market conditions, then, and only then do you begin to test it with real money. Back testing is only *Part* of system development. If you skip any of the steps in the progression, failure is the most likely outcome. Futures & Commodities trading is High Risk due to highly leverage markets. THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

If this is true, about all the big forums, I wonder what would happen if someone were to start a completely open forum where a "Hands off" moderation policy was the MO? Say moderating only things like swearing, or blatant personal attacks and such.

Well, of course no successful trader is going to teach poor mindsets. The rest of that comment is not talking about successful traders. It's talking about those who are not. I am not sure how you come up with that figure, unless you are thinking about doing extremely risky inverse pyramiding schemes. I don't play Forex, I play Futures, so let me try and give a futures based example. One point in the ES (S&P 500 E-Mini) is $12.50. The automated trading system we run our managed futures program with makes maybe 15 to 16 trades a month, and has gains that often around $400.00 (32 points) So if you calculate that out over a year, that is 72K profits in a year. Sounds real nice right? Well, you have to understand that NO system goes straight up. Every trading method known to man has periods of draw down. So while it may make nice gains when it is doing good, often even for periods of time, it's only a matter of time before you also have enough losers to negate a lot of those gains as well. Trading is risky. You cannot eliminate that risk. You will always have losing trades. Since you can't know how many will win, or lose, or even what the amounts are in a hypothetical guess like this, we need to go to the books to see what actually happened. In 2013 our one automated system for the ES was up 70% (after fees and commissions), in real money. That is dam good by anyone's standards. You would be hard pressed to find more than a few real systems that actually performs like that, or better. We require a starting capital of 5K per contract for our ES system. 70% of 5K is $3500.00. If you put up 50K, to trade 10 contracts at a time, you would have seen 35K added to your account in 2013. 35K a year is not a heck of a lot of money. Even if you invested that back into the account to add more contracts, you are still not going to see 100K the following year (assuming it does that good a second year in a row). That is a long, long way from being a billionaire. It will take a lot of compounding, and a long, long time of doing it to hit the big "B". So, I don't know where you get a Billion dollar number from, especially in a few years. You could be right. Trading is not easy. Anyone who can do it, will openly tell you that. In fact, it is really hard, and you get beat up way more than you would realize. Emotionally it takes a toll on you. This is especially so if you are trying to make a living from it. I am sure there are plenty of people who have wining methods, that simply cannot stomach the drawdown cycles. They just give up, get out, and write courses. Then they have to suffer being attacked and maligned when they are the very ones who bring working methods to the public. The truth of the matter, is that trading is a full time commitment...and most people simply cannot blow off work for years on end, to stare at a screen all day in order grow their account to the point where it's big enough to live off of. They have to pay the bills in the mean time. Who can afford to do that while they try and take their 10K account to the 500K they really need to make a living? It's a gamble if they can do it at all. We have not even taken into account the learning curve. Unless you are in the business, where it's your job to be pickled in this stuff, it's just not realistic. So the people writing courses may not be failures...maybe they are honest people trying to figure out how to make it happen with a good system? I think there is no way to tell what a real trader, who is successful, will be doing, or not doing. Someone who has put so much effort to actually getting good at this game, is probably a little obsessed with said game...so why would they not be on forums? We are. DISCLAIMER: THE PRECEDING POST IS STRICTLY HYPOTHETICAL IN NATURE, FOR THE PURPOSES OF EDUCATION AND DISCUSSION *ONLY* THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS.

I don't know if this is 100% true. However, I do know one guy who has proven skills. He actually has several good systems that work. He is very reclusive though. He also really values his free time. So what he did was to code his various systems, and now his computer runs them for him, automatically. He is a good guy, but the last thing he would ever do is make a trading course and sell it to anyone. He has no motivation to do that. It's a huge, huge overwhelming undertaking (Believe me, I did it myself). He could just as easily be on the golf course while his computer trades for him. He does lease the programs out to a brokerage (which is how I know him, as I am an AP for said brokerage), who uses them to run their managed futures program. However, you will never see, or hear anything from him personally. He won't even share how the systems work with us. When I see the over all attitude towards those who are on the education side of the industry, I can completely understand why someone who can trade, would never step up and start teaching anyone. You would instantly go from being someone who is a respected, successful professional, to having the reputation as being a liar and a scamer whether you deserved it or not. Just look at the overwhelming opinion on educators in this thread alone. No real professional is going to tarnish themselves like that. DISCLAIMER: THE PRECEDING POST IS STRICTLY HYPOTHETICAL IN NATURE, FOR THE PURPOSES OF EDUCATION AND DISCUSSION *ONLY* THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS.

Nope. You pretty much have to wait till it starts making the move, and then jump on. Ride it out till the pattern begins to dissolve, and get out. It does allow you to see the move in it's early phases though; and you can see where the real (and often moving) support and resistance is. So you have a better gauge on when to exit the trade. You have to enter, and exit by hand though. Since everything is in a constant state of flux, you can't preplace orders, including Stoploss orders (I still place what I call emergency stops well outside of the trade in case I have a stroke, or heart attack or am prevented from a manual exit some how). The way I play the game, is more like surfing than how most people look at trading. The fact that I cannot use any predetermined parameters, and basically surf the trade as it is in play, is why I can't use the method to trade customer accounts. DISCLAIMER: THE PRECEDING POST IS STRICTLY HYPOTHETICAL IN NATURE, FOR THE PURPOSES OF EDUCATION AND DISCUSSION *ONLY* THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

If you look how the outer bands come in close together, and then open up, That is a classic Bollinger band squeeze, and a confirmation.

I think this is one reason why guys become brokers, even though they can trade just fine. The income coming in pays the bills during the drawdowns. I'd add that the income from the job as a broker, is a huge stress reliever, because you know the bills will be paid. You don't have the stress of the baby needing new shoes hammering down on you with every trade you place.

Does anyone here play the Bollinger band Squeeze? If so, have you tried using it in conjunction with more basic break out of congestion patterns like 1-2-3, Double Top/Bottom and head & Shoulder patterns?

The use of Bollinger Bands and moving averages can be very helpful to quantify the break out. Although, I actually like to do it backwards. I look for breakouts of congestion, to be signs that my Bollinger band set up is good. What i do, is watch for a bollinger band set up. Then I can remove it from the screen and see if there is also a more common break out set up as well. If I have both a recognized bollinger Band set up, AND a recognized break out at the same time, then I know my BB set up is good, and I can trust it.

I think Gold can go either way in the near future. On the weekly chart, I have what I call a bullish "Spear Point" set up. However, if I scale down to the daily chart I see it is at resistance right now. The question, is if the daily chart will just go sideways the rest of this week, or turn down. If it goes sideways, then there is a pretty good chance we will see a few bars of bullish activity on the weekly chart. If it turns down, the price bounces off of resistance, then I think we can see lower prices over the next few weeks. THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

I examined the method years ago. My thought is that it gives off too many false signals. So you need some way to optimize it. Although, this is my complaint about any system that relies solely on break outs of congestion (Or 20 day tight channels as in this case) THE RISK OF LOSS IN TRADING COMMODITIES CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. THE HIGH DEGREE OF LEVERAGE THAT IS OFTEN ATTAINABLE IN COMMODITY TRADING CAN WORK FOR YOU, AS WELL AS AGAINST YOU. PAST PERFORMANCE IS NOT NECESSARILY INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS

I would like to point out, that market conditions can prevent ANY kind of order form executing. For example, a Limit order may trigger, but if volume dries up and there is no one to take the other side of the trade, it may not actually execute. Same if there is a limit move, or the market is stopped for some reason. Not saying your ideas are not usable. It just that you should understand that risk, and slippage cannot really be eliminated for sure. Be aware of that.

Agreed. Of course, you have to have good rules too. That is where years of market study, and a constant study of ideas and methods is essential.

My thought is that ALL traders lose money. It's not possible to trade, without losing. However, that said, I think just as many win too. It's making sure those wins are bigger than the loses. I suspect that those who stick with it do better than most people think.

Although you and I probably use different tools, it sounds like we have a very similar philosophy when it comes to trading. My stops are generally put just past a major support and resistance level. I see them as "Emergency Exits" only. Say I have a heart attack, or I lose my internet connection and can't see whats going on, my stop is there to save my account in emergencies like that. It's not there for trade management at all. I get in, and get out manually. If I ever actually hit a stop, something is very wrong. Have set up, enter. Lose set up, exit. It's shockingly simple.

I ignore all of these rules. I enter when I have a set up, and exit when it evaporates...that is all I do. Those are the only rules I follow.

Yes, I am talking the ES Here is the thing. I don't actually trade this way. I wouldn't. It's not my forte. I do understand how that trading style works, of course. However, I have my own set ups that I look for. On the other hand, many times one of my set ups will occur somewhere below the high of the previous day. In THAT case, I may enter and set an MIT at, or right under the previous high, to get me out so i can take the money and run (as they saying goes) If I am going to keep my eyes glued to the screen, I can also exit using my exit rules based on the relation of the price, the 3 main moving averages and the bollinger bands to each other. If I am not glued to the screen, then I might use the MIT at the previous days high so I don't have to watch it every second like a horse race. So for me, I can't really answer where i would enter, because my entry is based on another system of trading. It varies, because my set ups occur independently of where the price is. I don't look to break areas of previous support and resistance. My set ups are totally based on the price, moving average and bollinger band relationships. When I see the right relationship, I enter, and hold until it dissolves. Where the price is, or isnt when the set up forms, and dissolves is not even relevant to me. I only care if the set up IS, or ISN'T solid. Again, my personal method. It's not limited t the ES (but it does work with it) As for the order type, since I generally like to enter manually, if I see a solid set up, and my entries are not based on price, but the existence, or not, of my set ups, I generally pull the trigger with market orders for the fastest in and out execution. The only real exception, like I said above, is if I am being lazy and just want to exit as son as I hit a level I am really sure it's going to hit. The previous days high is one example. I more often use my MITs at, or near the outer bollinger band. I use MITs over Limit orders because they become market orders on execution. I do this because I want a rock solid exit. where as a Limit order may be touched, but before your order gets filled the price drops below it and never goes back up. This often happens when you are too optimistic of the range for the day. The MIT helps me to ensure a fill, even if it's a bit under my price (Because I am probably wrong anyway). I never care how much I made on a trade, ONLY if I profited, or not. so if I had a $100.00 with a limit order, but instead used an MIT, and filled with half that profit, I don't care. I still made $50. If I had used a Limit, and the price just touched it, and the 20 orders ahead of mine got filled, then the price dropped under the limit before mine could, maybe I will never get filled because the market turned at that point and just dropped and dropped until what was a win, is now a loss. The MIT helps prevent that. Sometimes i set MITs at arbitrary points with the intention of getting out manually. However if my MIT gets hit, i want an automatic out because I may be trying to hold on too long by then. I now my psychology. If I set an MIT at a place I could make good money, I am good. I can do this BEFORE the heat of the game starts effecting me. I may still get out sooner if my set up is obviously dissolving though. In that case my MIT becomes a bit of an insurance policy against my own psychological weaknesses. All that is way off topic though. Really needs it's own thread.

My personal thoughts on this are along the lines of, I don't like to trade more than 1/3 of my account at any one time. maybe even no more than a 1/4. Based on my personal day trading system (Not the automated algorithm I am also discussing), I would need 50K of operating capital to make a living. This means a minimum of a 150K account. Frankly, I want 250K to trade 50K at a time. The system works by taking very small slices, when maximum momentum, is on my side so I have a very high probability of winning. If I am not confidant I can make $50 to $100 on a trade, with an 80% chance of success, I won't trade. If we are talking something like corn, I only need one winning trade month to pay all my bills and have money to chase women. However, that system will not work exclusively with the E-Mini. I have to search all major market sectors for the right set ups. I can't limit myself, so it' not really relevant to this particular thread other than to discuss the money management issue you just brought up. I also agree that having a side stream of income is essential. To me, this is not to have a steady flow of income because trading is erratic. But more for psychological reasons. When you know your bills are covered, you don't feel pressured to trade, to meet your financial responsibilities. Having a side income that can cover your basic expenses, means you can relax and just trade when you feel like it, no pressure. This prevents over trading. Over trading blows out accounts. You want to avoid it.

No. I mean the logs are the actual real market entry trades that were taken. Not demos.

Also, maybe in your rush to lynch someone for no reason you became a little confused. When I said proven, I meant I have the actual real time trade logs showing each trade as they occurred. Those logs prove what the performance was from Jan 2011 to now. As for your "No sale" comment. I don't quite understand that. I was not intending on selling you the trade logs if you PMed me. i was going to just send you a copy. I never really intended to make an offer like that. You have been challenging and insulting. I was basically answering your challenge with the facts...which you are now clearly running from by acting like you are not interested. The truth of the matter is you have been acting like a disrespectful ass, and are about to get checked by the trade logs if you were to actually look at them. so now you have to run away. I mean, God forbid someone you have been attacking actually have some proof you can't refute.