Search found 5 matches

by CRMCM
Fri May 08, 2009 7:44 am
Forum: Testing and Simulation
Topic: Mean reversion system
Replies: 35
Views: 16820

I think that one of the reasons that some pure trend-followers (eg, Richard Dennis and his cohort) do not want to miss even a single big trend is that big trends are relatively rare. I found that these people mostly trade only futures markets, which do not have that many markets, especially when yo...
by CRMCM
Fri May 08, 2009 12:34 am
Forum: Testing and Simulation
Topic: Mean reversion system
Replies: 35
Views: 16820

It seems to me that CRMCM's need for a "positive feedback loop" to confirm a trend involves a disctrionary decision (no criticism intended). One that I would be unable to make; for me it would destroy my purpose in following a mechanical system. No offense taken, its all a matter of perspective. I ...
by CRMCM
Sun May 03, 2009 6:10 pm
Forum: Stocks
Topic: survivor bias
Replies: 6
Views: 5296

If you are testing to put real money at work use paid for data that you know will yield results comparable to the real world. It's shocking that anyone would penny pinch on data - its the equivalent of a fundamentally driven hedge fund having a $0 research budget. Garbage in, Garbage out.
by CRMCM
Sun May 03, 2009 6:01 pm
Forum: Testing and Simulation
Topic: Mean reversion system
Replies: 35
Views: 16820

My take is that feedback loops cause big trends but not all big trends have feedback loops. Some trends may or may not have a positive feed back loop but many do. When I see a trend develop I look to see if there is a positive feedback loop in place, if so, I want to participate. This is how I'm dif...
by CRMCM
Sun May 03, 2009 12:01 am
Forum: Testing and Simulation
Topic: Mean reversion system
Replies: 35
Views: 16820

I definitely agree that positive feedback loops drive trends - the big massive trends that make everything worth it. It's surprising that more people don't see the "obvious". All the better for those that do ;)