"Look at a stone cutter hammering away at his rock, perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the hundred-and-first blow it will split in two, and I know it was not the last blow that did it, but all that had gone before." -- Jacob A. RiisMT
"Risk is trying to control something you are powerless over." -- Eric Clapton
"I sometimes meet people who say, I'm going to be this and I'm going to be that. You feel kind of bad for them because they're limiting themselves. It's different from having an enthusiasm for something and seeing where life takes you. I feel lucky to never have planned to go into what I did. I always said, "All I want to do is make things, whether it's drawing or writing." If I'd said, "I'm going to be a director," it probably wouldn't have happened." -- Tim Burton
"Pick a mountain in life to climb and don't stop til' you reach the top. When you reach the top...be lookin' for the next mountain to climb." -- Life philosophy of Helen Taylor
"Do what you gotta do so you can do what you want to do"MT
-- Denzel Washington
"The Things to do are: the things that need doing, that you see need to be done, and that no one else seems to see need to be done. Then you will conceive your own way of doing that which needs to be done — that no one else has told you to do or how to do it. This will bring out the real you that often gets buried inside a character that has acquired a superficial array of behaviors induced or imposed by others on the individual." -- Bucky FullerGreat quote. What do you see that needs to be done? And more importantly...what are you doing about it? But, a precaution...doing what needs to be done that hasn't been done by others prompts others to stall/halt the doing. Do you have what it takes to overcome the others in order to get the doing done?
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction." -- Albert EinsteinSomething to think about when developing systems.
"...the most important quality for a trader to develop is discipline. As you've read, my stubborn ego and impatience prevented me from achieving lasting success and financial security. I hope my story has shown you that any fool can get lucky and quickly make a great deal of money. But, if playing the stock market was always that easy, there would be no need for research and hard work. Considering that all the information you need to be able to profit is available on the Internet, what sets successful traders apart is their ability to wade through all the muck. With regard to your sources, keep an open mind. As my losses demonstrate, if you allow your emotions and ego to control your trading, you are doomed to fail." -- Timothy Sykes from his book, An American Hedge FundWhat great words of advice! Reading Tim's book brought back the memories of what it was like trading in the greatest stock bubble of our time. In fact, I participated in the ISCO trade he mentions in the book. What a ride, indeed!
"I really believe that success is just getting up one more time than you fall. It doesn't come from one brilliant idea, but from a bunch of small decisions that accumulate over the years. And you shouldn't underestimate the amount of work that's involved, the amount of fear that's involved." -- Roxanne QuimbyI love unconventional success stories. And Inc.com shares a great one with Burt's Bees founder, Roxanne Quimby.
After Burt's Bees, What? from Business Week
Interview with Burt's Bees founder, Roxanne Quimby from Hilary Magazine.
"If you spend some time thinking about it ("ideal position sizing") you will realize that life just isn’t so simple. Every individual has different tolerances for different types of risks. A formula won’t capture all of them and a formula most certainly hides information that might be very valuable." -- Curtis FaithGreat article posted by Curtis today . Discusses some of what I found to be true in regards to the Sharpe Ratio and smoothness of returns. In fact, through much testing I have found using any type of volatility measure in my trading systems (entry, exit, position sizing, etc.) produces sub-par results when real-world results take effect. But, sometimes, those are the best measures we have. So, what do you do?
I’ll leave you with an exercise. Take your favorite position sizing methodology and then see what might happen if you happened to take the wrong side of a trade using that methodology on September 11th, 2001 or on Black Monday (October 19th, 1987).In regard to formulas hiding valuable information. Pay attention to your stock data. There's a formula in there adjusting your time series for splits and possibly dividends. The longer term your system is...the more important this adjustment formula will play in your overall results. Common entry/exits formulas such as Average True Range (ATR) become rather out-of-date when processing IBM back in the 1960's. Something for all aspiring long-term trend-followers to consider when backtesting their systems.
"It turns out that it is much easier to make money when you are wrong most of the time. If your trades are losers most of the time, that shows that you are not trying to predict the future. For this reason, you no longer care about the outcome of any particular trade since you expect that trade to lose money. When you expect a trade to lose money, you also realize that the outcome of a particular trade does not indicate anything about your intelligence. Simply put, to win you need to free yourself and your thinking of outcome bias. It does not matter what happens with any particular trade."
-- Curtis Faith in Way of the Turtle --
We shall not cease from explorationMT
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
-- T.S. Eliot
"Brick by brick my citizens, brick by brick" -- Emperor Hadrian of RomeI haven't posted much in awhile. Mainly because the more I learn the less I know. The less I feel I can share. The less certain I feel about things. The study of the market is a strange bird. So different than anything else I've dug into.
"You better know whatcha wanna to do, before somebody knows it for you." -- Charles Farmer in The Astronaut FarmerHope everyone is having a great week. Mine's been busy as ever. I hope to catch up on some reading over the weekend. Finish up the book, Trend Trading by Kedrick Brown. Dig in a bit more into the C language. Yes, I said C...the latin of programming languages.
Ran across this great interview of Joel Spolsky from Salon back in 2004. The dude has some great things to say...Shlemiel gets a job as a street painter, painting the dotted lines down the middle of the road. On the first day he takes a can of paint out to the road and finishes 300 yards of the road. "That's pretty good!" says his boss, "you're a fast worker!" and pays him a kopeck.
The next day Shlemiel only gets 150 yards done. "Well, that's not nearly as good as yesterday, but you're still a fast worker. 150 yards is respectable," and pays him a kopeck.
The next day Shlemiel paints 30 yards of the road. "Only 30!" shouts his boss. "That's unacceptable! On the first day you did ten times that much work! What's going on?" "I can't help it," says Shlemiel. "Every day I get farther and farther away from the paint can!" -- Shlemiel the painter algorithm
There's certainly a lot of faux methodologies, what I often call "big-M" methodologies, extreme programming being a very popular one right now. And even when they're reflecting good ideas or best practices, the real goal of the methodologies is to sell books, not to actually solve anybody's problem. And selling the books is actually just a way to sell consulting engagements that the people who write those books do at high cost; that's their career -- giving speeches to people working for very boring companies on how to do software better.
The fundamental problem that you're trying to solve here is that humans think of things in vague, mushy terms. In order to visualize something, they don't have to actually visualize every part of it. Whereas the programmer, in order to actually implement that thing, to create it, needs to have every part specified.Read Joel's Back to Basics post for more interesting tidbits on Shlemiel the painter algorithm, Pascal strings, and my favorite...XML performance issues. I've developed and supported EDI transaction processing for over 9 years and witnessed first hand the problems Joel discusses with XML. Great stuff!
(continued...)
So your brain doesn't actually work the way a computer works. Your brain doesn't assume that there's all this input coming in and then process it. Instead, it just has a variety of senses available to it, and it picks the ones it wants to answer whatever questions it has right now. So you ask questions, and your eye goes and finds out the information it needs. So you're used to thinking that you have the big picture , and you don't.
(continued some more...)
And so what a programmer is doing when they translate a quote unquote spec into quote unquote code, although it seems like a translation process, what they're actually doing is filling in lots and lots of details. And as programmers are wont to do, they're trying to take something, the vague thing that the humans want, and make it very, very specific, which is the kind of thing the computer wants. That's not really a translation; it's more of an interpretation. It's a very hard thing to do.
Boy: "Do not try and bend the spoon. It is impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth."
Neo: "What truth?"
Boy: "There is no spoon."
Neo: "There is no spoon?"
Boy: "Then you'll see that it is not the spoon that bends...it is only yourself."
-- from the Matrix (one of my all-time favorite movies)
