Ideally, my dream software would have the ability to see five bars into the future in any time frame.
Sabrinian
Search found 7 matches
- Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:20 am
- Forum: Testing Software
- Topic: Imagining the Dream Testing Software?
- Replies: 18
- Views: 23482
- Sun Aug 24, 2003 9:58 pm
- Forum: Testing and Simulation
- Topic: Historical Data
- Replies: 31
- Views: 33666
- Sun Aug 24, 2003 10:55 am
- Forum: Testing and Simulation
- Topic: Historical Data
- Replies: 31
- Views: 33666
Re: Data
Sir G,
Sabrinian
We use CQG intraday data! What would you do if you could do it all again?Sir G wrote:I use CQG intraday data, would I do it again? No...
Sabrinian
- Fri Aug 22, 2003 12:19 pm
- Forum: Testing and Simulation
- Topic: Historical Data
- Replies: 31
- Views: 33666
Has any one tried out C.I.S intraday/tick futures data?
They seem so cheap compared to CGQ that I can't help but question the quality of the data.
http://moss.bayou.com/smcg/
Sabrinian
They seem so cheap compared to CGQ that I can't help but question the quality of the data.
http://moss.bayou.com/smcg/
Sabrinian
- Thu Jul 17, 2003 8:24 pm
- Forum: Money Management
- Topic: Equity allocation for multi system trading
- Replies: 9
- Views: 9417
Steady_jake A Freudian slip, possibly? Touché! Ouch! You are quite right! But it wasn't a slip. I was aware of this when I posted. It does indeed seem complex when you write out. However, the actual spreadsheets used to do the ranking aren't really that complex. Basically, you have a bunch of risk ...
- Thu Jul 17, 2003 8:07 am
- Forum: Money Management
- Topic: Equity allocation for multi system trading
- Replies: 9
- Views: 9417
- Sat Jul 05, 2003 2:32 am
- Forum: Testing and Simulation
- Topic: Too Good to be True?
- Replies: 17
- Views: 18069
steady_jake, I do a lot of system proto-typing in WealthLab and have coded 4 similarly “Great” systems. Unfortunately, in each and every case I discovered I had created a post-dictive error. Wealthlab is quick, cheap, and, if you understand simple programming, very easy to use. But it is VERY, VERY ...