Why Top Retail traders V Commercial Traders

[Shakone]

Morning Shakone

I will answer you correctly and professionally as i think your agenda is different to your mate's

Mathematical formulae can suffer with many anomalies and this particular ratio is well skewed simply because it was designed approx half a century ago for stock investments.

Its back to comparing Jessie Livermore's trading ideas with HFT -

A "one size fit" all ratio just simply does not work - and if you don't believe me check out on google all the critics who show its weaknesses.

Its like using "one size" fitness ratio to compare all sports people - ie like a body fat ratio for Mo Farah and then saying a top Rugby International cannot be any good at all as he his far too fat compared to Mo ;-)

Random even gave himself away with the mistakes he made on the calculations and then trying to say it must be down to the SD etc etc.

I really don't want to take 2 hrs pulling the ratio apart - and will not be doing it.

Whether my ratio is 1.64 or 2.2 or even 5 - it's totally irrelevant as far as I am concerned - and yes - i do disagree with the bodies who would only use it in isolation

Have a good week

Regards

F

No, that response is unprofessional and incorrect.

I am not dealing with whether you're profitable and don't really care. I am only dealing with what you've said on your Sharpe ratio.

Now the issue is not whether someone who has a Sharpe higher than mine is doing better. Nobody is discussing even that, so it's not about comparing Sharpe ratios for different styles.

It's a formula or a function if you prefer to view it that way. You put in numbers you get out a number. There are no anomalies with this. Numbers in, number out.

You put your numbers in and you got out 1.64 according to your claim. Again, I'm not arguing whether 1.64 is good or bad. The point is that you claimed this. And if you claimed this, and also claimed that you make 2% a day on average, then I can calculate the volatility of your daily returns. This volatility turns out to be very large for someone who never has a losing day. In fact it is not possible that the numbers are true. So something is wrong somewhere.

Which part did you lie about? This issue isn't going to go away until you address it. And waffling about anomalies that don't exist isn't going to help.

 

[Shakone]

For those who are confused by Sharpe ratio, I will give an equivalent of why I am questioning him:

Suppose someone has been asked for some trading figures, lets say he gives average win of 15 pips and average loss of 5 pips. Lets say he also tells me that his expectancy is 7. Now suppose if he also claimed his win rate is 80%. I look at the formula and see:

15*0.8 - 5*0.2 = 11

Hmmm, that's not right, he said expectancy was 7

Not only that, but we can find his win rate from the expectancy formula, which turns out to be 60% if the other figures on average win and expectancy are correct. But he claimed 80%.

Now if you'd done this, and so realised that at least one of the numbers given MUST be wrong, how would you feel about someone suggesting this is some sort of mathematical anomaly, and that it doesn't apply to retail forex accounts and trying to pull the wool over people's eyes who don't understand expectancy (or in Fxmo's case Sharpe)?

I hope this hypothetical example clears up that there really is no way out of this except that some number Fxmo has claimed must be wrong, and why I don't accept any of this nonsense about the maths not working for him or doesn't apply. I'm not requesting him to prove a single thing, only to explain the obvious mistake that exists from his claims.

Of course if he admits that he lied about his results, which he must have, then I'm happy to leave it there.

 

[Forexmospherian]

No, that response is unprofessional and incorrect.

I am not dealing with whether you're profitable and don't really care. I am only dealing with what you've said on your Sharpe ratio.

Now the issue is not whether someone who has a Sharpe higher than mine is doing better. Nobody is discussing even that, so it's not about comparing Sharpe ratios for different styles.

It's a formula or a function if you prefer to view it that way. You put in numbers you get out a number. There are no anomalies with this. Numbers in, number out.

You put your numbers in and you got out 1.64 according to your claim. Again, I'm not arguing whether 1.64 is good or bad. The point is that you claimed this. And if you claimed this, and also claimed that you make 2% a day on average, then I can calculate the volatility of your daily returns. This volatility turns out to be very large for someone who never has a losing day. In fact it is not possible that the numbers are true. So something is wrong somewhere.

Which part did you lie about? This issue isn't going to go away until you address it. And waffling about anomalies that don't exist isn't going to help.

Easy answer - I gave a figure of 1.64 to Random to see what he would come back with and if you want check then what he said - and then he admitted he made a mistake on the SD part in his calculations and of course did not know my days count etc - ie I played Random at his own game - so please now say we are both deceived each other if that makes you feel better

I have not even worked out my Sharpe ratio for 2013 - or for prior years and have no intention - at all - of doing it - as it is totally irrelevant for me - as I am not after funding and have no reason to know how apples compare with oranges

I have repeated this so many times - and you initially was always complaining of me repeating myself - what's changed now.

To make it more insulting - you lied again when you have said that you have no interest with my other thread - when you have been on it again this afternoon - and you have said I am losing it -

As I said before to Random - I gave him the list of the ratios I count as having far more bearings for me in a retail forex intraday environment.

Would you like me to share my proper results on those ratios with you now?

If you do - its a shame - because I am not going to

Now if you would like to make 100 more complaining or derogatory comments on this thread - feel free - you will get 101 answers back

Have a good week

Regards

F

 

[Shakone]

Easy answer - I gave a figure of 1.64 to Random to see what he would come back with and if you want check then what he said - and then he admitted he made a mistake on the SD part in his calculations and of course did not know my days count etc - ie I played Random at his own game - so please now say we are both deceived each other if that makes you feel better

I have not even worked out my Sharpe ratio for 2013 - or for prior years and have no intention - at all - of doing it - as it is totally irrelevant for me - as I am not after funding and have no reason to know how apples compare with oranges

I have repeated this so many times - and you initially was always complaining of me repeating myself - what's changed now.

To make it more insulting - you lied again when you have said that you have no interest with my other thread - when you have been on it again this afternoon - and you have said I am losing it -

As I said before to Random - I gave him the list of the ratios I count as having far more bearings for me in a retail forex intraday environment.

Would you like me to share my proper results on those ratios with you now?

If you do - its a shame - because I am not going to

Now if you would like to make 100 more complaining or derogatory comments on this thread - feel free - you will get 101 answers back

Have a good week

Regards

F

Ok sure. So you lied about your results. That's fine. I have nothing else to say on that and glad it's clarified.

I did try to help MajorMagnuM on your thread, because he didn't seem to know the basics of what he was doing, but I won't make the mistake of helping anyone on your journal thread again and have just put the thread on ignore. Cheers.

 

[Forexmospherian]

I have just seen on your last comment Shakone - someone who claims I have never had a losing day

See yet again dropping in small lies to try and discredit me = typical of a "spoiler"

I have never ever said that

Repeat that - I have never ever said that

My key objective is not to have a losing day - yes a priority last 2 years - - but I still have the odd few - especially if I cannot be bothered to do an additional 3 - 6 trades to try and get the account back into the black for the day.

Today as been another day when I have not made by 50 pip target - as I have spent most of the day out - but still 38 pips and a reasonable profit and I am not planning to take any more trades just atm

In my approx 11 years of trading - of which over 6 years full time - up until four years ago - i would have losing days every month.

I will have gone a full year if i can get to the end of May 2014 without having a losing day - So that means as of now I have never achieved a full year of trading -(well say over 190-200 days) without at least one day loss.

Black Swan events do happen - and I always expect them to carry on happening as any experienced trader knows

Do you now plan next to say -

I compound every day - never has one losing trade and makes 300 trades a week

I am sure some member will be thinking that's what I do now ;-))

Had enough - off for tea

Regards

F

 

[Forexmospherian]

Ok sure. So you lied about your results. That's fine. I have nothing else to say on that and glad it's clarified.

I did try to help MajorMagnuM on your thread, because he didn't seem to know the basics of what he was doing, but I won't make the mistake of helping anyone on your journal thread again and have just put the thread on ignore. Cheers.

i really do welcome you on the thread when ever you want to and also thank you for assisting anyone who might be participating and is confused or lost

That is not a problem I can assure you - and normally - I would not even have pointed it out

Regards

F

 

[Forexmospherian]

For those who are confused by Sharpe ratio, I will give an equivalent of why I am questioning him:

Suppose someone has been asked for some trading figures, lets say he gives average win of 15 pips and average loss of 5 pips. Lets say he also tells me that his expectancy is 7. Now suppose if he also claimed his win rate is 80%. I look at the formula and see:

15*0.8 - 5*0.2 = 11

Hmmm, that's not right, he said expectancy was 7

Not only that, but we can find his win rate from the expectancy formula, which turns out to be 60% if the other figures on average win and expectancy are correct. But he claimed 80%.

Now if you'd done this, and so realised that at least one of the numbers given MUST be wrong, how would you feel about someone suggesting this is some sort of mathematical anomaly, and that it doesn't apply to retail forex accounts and trying to pull the wool over people's eyes who don't understand expectancy (or in Fxmo's case Sharpe)?

I hope this hypothetical example clears up that there really is no way out of this except that some number Fxmo has claimed must be wrong, and why I don't accept any of this nonsense about the maths not working for him or doesn't apply. I'm not requesting him to prove a single thing, only to explain the obvious mistake that exists from his claims.

Of course if he admits that he lied about his results, which he must have, then I'm happy to leave it there.

Sorry - I after to question your calculations on the Sharpe ratio calculation you have shown

That formula is not the standard formula - and certainly not the one Random was banding about.?

That one is just based on a win ratio and pip difference ?

What is the expectancy of 7 and the true result you show of 11 related to ??

Is this ratio for apples and oranges again ?

Standard Deviation as to also bring in size of win monies against losses as well as the deviations on win ratios and for me - based on the number of trades made last year with the win ratios in batches of 100's it ranges from as low as 61% to as high as 87% - Ok you can get a mean - but it does not tell you the whole story at all -

Sorry - I don't want to end up going through case studies etc etc

 

[Shakone]

Sorry - I after to question your calculations on the Sharpe ratio calculation you have shown

That formula is not the standard formula - and certainly not the one Random was banding about.?

That one is just based on a win ratio and pip difference ?

What is the expectancy of 7 and the true result you show of 11 related to ??

Is this ratio for apples and oranges again ?

Standard Deviation as to also bring in size of win monies against losses as well as the deviations on win ratios and for me - based on the number of trades made last year with the win ratios in batches of 100's it ranges from as low as 61% to as high as 87% - Ok you can get a mean - but it does not tell you the whole story at all -

Sorry - I don't want to end up going through case studies etc etc

This is a hypothetical example, and is not the Sharpe ratio. I'm using it to explain a principle, which is why I didn't use your name for it, and used the term "someone".

There is nothing left to argue on this Fxmo, you admitted making up the Sharpe ratio and that's the end of it.

 

[Shakone]

HI Shakone, i have responded to your answer on the other thread. Whatever is going on here, the sentiment of constructive help was appreciated. I have set out my understanding, but will read more on this aspect of trading before i ever go live.

No problem MajorMagnuM, I hope my comments were helpful. The reason I posted is because I do actually think it can be dangerous to your account to not know how this really works. Also if you have a dodgy broker, and don't know how things are calculated you could be ripped off. It happened to me once on commissions, and although the broker later corrected it and paid me for the error after I raised the issue, if I didn't know how it should have worked I probably wouldn't have spotted the error.

 

[Forexmospherian]

[/I][/B]Sorry Shakone - you have change post 147 - after I pointed out the error and now added the words - an equivalent to the Sharpe Ratio - which of course not what you originally said - and that''s why I challenged it

That's no problem - but its important that anyone following all this "dross" knows you posted it originally as the Sharpe Ratio - which of course was incorrect

I must now go back and see if Random changed his errors etc as well

Your a great double act - I will admit ;-)

Regards

F

 

[Forexmospherian]

Is it possible to play with or alter the edit times on this forum - as something in not adding up here ???
- ie a 2 hr difference on an edit - but not shown on Shakone's 147 post ????

 

[Shakone]

[/I][/B]Sorry Shakone - you have change post 147 - after I pointed out the error and now added the words - an equivalent to the Sharpe Ratio - which of course not what you originally said - and that''s why I challenged it

That's no problem - but its important that anyone following all this "dross" knows you posted it originally as the Sharpe Ratio - which of course was incorrect

I must now go back and see if Random changed his errors etc as well

Your a great double act - I will admit ;-)

Regards

F

Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct one. You misread my post. You're not renowned for your attention to detail FXmo. From the looks of things I finished the post at 4:12pm, you responded around two hours later. I don't believe it's possible to edit it without the edit time changing from 4:12. So are you now saying another lie? I don't think you should make it worse for yourself, paranoia is not helpful.

The case is closed Fxmo. You lied about your results. That's ok, lots of people lie. This sort of thing is common on forums. We're done now.



MajorMagnuM, Fxmo's thread is now on ignore, so I won't see your response. But the best thing to do is go through the numbers yourself and confirm they match up with what your broker is saying. It's not that hard to do, and it's the only real way to get an understanding imo.

 

[malaguti]

anyone following all this "dross"

Not a chance, this has to be one of the funniest threads going at the moment..hours of entertainment here

 

[Pondlifedregsbutler]

This thread needs death threats

 

[Liquid validity]

forexperian.....dont waste time on a Demo as you will not then be trading live .........
which is what you do so why change for us .....
just copy some daily or weekly trades/statements and show them here suitably covered in the appropriate places

eveyones time is being wasted here at the moment

The fact that I am NOT selling anything - whether I earn 2 p per annum or 2 million is therefore of no importance - other than satisfying and other "nosey" or inquisitive members.

Unfortunately - unless it can be verified by KPMG or PWC - and nobody else - it could just be totally false ;-)

Why not just take the chance and post some trade statements anyway?
Nobody is asking you to prove what you make.
Trade statements like the post below will suffice:
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/for...ders-v-commercial-traders-15.html#post2252366

Its easy enough to tell if they have been photo shopped or not.
Just press print screen, paste into MS paint, paintbrush the
sensitive data out, save as png, attach png image to post - job done,
and speculation ended

Its no big deal, and I'm surprised you are bothered by what anyone would think,
or their reactions to any statements you post, as comments regarding other
aspects of your trading clearly don't bother you.
Its simple, quick and puts an end to the issue once and for all

 

[Forexmospherian]

And a car chase around the M25 followed by an orgy with some femail forex groupies at a remote farm in Kent ;-)

 

[Forexmospherian]

Hi LV

i know I cannot win here - but will keep my powder dry and save my trump cards until later on this year ;-))

Have a good day

Regards

F

 

[NVP]

And a car chase around the M25 followed by an orgy with some femail forex groupies at a remote farm in Kent ;-)

no chance .......have you seen the M25 recently ?

 

[random12345]

"Random even gave himself away with the mistakes he made on the calculations and then trying to say it must be down to the SD etc etc."

This is amazing. Can we please have a headcount as to who believes it is me that made the mistake with my understanding of Sharpe ratios or FXmo?

Bearing in mind I posed the following to him:

- either your Sharpe is something unheard of in the live brokerage community (as it would be if his claims re 2% a day for 180 days at a tiny daily variance would lead to)

or

- either your volatility is enormous to hack down a 355% return to a reasonable Sharpe.

His answer was that his Sharpe is 1.64 and as you can see with his ludicrous ongoing argument with Shakone, he made this up for some reason known only to his genius (haha!). Thus we now have to assume point 1 applies again...

I had to hold his hand through to any sort of understanding, much like teaching the thick kid differentiation. He has now attempted to spin my constant attempts to try and do the mathematics for him or lead him down the right path such that I "gave myself away with mistakes..." what IS he talking about? This individual posts bothersome drivel that shames these boards - many of the old timers simply have the silly old git on ignore, but I like to see exactly what it is that everyone else is seeing. A laughing stock of a forum....

 

[random12345]

Not a chance, this has to be one of the funniest threads going at the moment..hours of entertainment here

As we discussed in numerous threads the forum is dying, retail trading is contracting and you are happy with what we are left with...? Is that really lulz? I would find it amusing as a third party, but it's more pathetic than funny that our greatest expert doling out advice to newbies is entirely clueless about both the retail and commercial ends of the business.