If you are new to method trading, after reading our previous article (“Futures Method Trading – Reality Check”) you might feel a bit apprehensive about the whole business. Which is good because you should. We have a vast wild jungle out there together with swamps scattered all over somewhat generously. One false phase and you just said goodbye to a nice chunk of money.
How then should you choose your body, you may ask. The quick answer is: the same way hedgehogs multiply, that is, cautiously… The particular long answer is that you have got three options and each of which can be good if applied judiciously.
The first option and also probably the best one is to discover a vendor who offers his or her system through a broker (using Tradestation or Strategy Walker to generate orders) and charge based on the actual profits his / her system makes in your profile per month. That usually means a new 10-20 % cut connected with real profits for the dealer. Vendors like that are thin on the ground and if you ever go for one like that you want to be sure that you know how his system was done in the past in a real
profile and not on paper. The loan broker that handles the vendor’s small business or the vendor himself should be in a position and even eager to provide such information. If they can’t, have a tendency to bother as this is usually the sign that you are dealing with some good business. If the system is completely new and there is only a limited degree of information about its actual recent performance you may want to wait for 25 percent or two to see how the technique is doing. Rush is never good in these matters.
The second selection is to buy a good process from a reputable vendor. You intend to buy a system that is thoroughly disclosed and it is very useful to choose a system that has little or no room for curve-fitting (no more than 1 to 2 parameters that happen to be optimally adjusted in the backtesting process) over a system who has plenty of room for this. Often the latter are usually less solid than the former. If the technique is not fully disclosed (i. e., it comes as a bleak or black box) you’ll never know if it was hard-wired and to what extent. This isn’t good as it is rather simple to produce a system with an ideal past performance by curve-fitting it to the data. It doesn’t matter how naive to expect that the process designed this way will go on its stellar performance. And the second is more likely, that is, the system, staying not very robust, might disentangle as soon as you start using it. Currently, how to make sure
that you are managing a reputable vendor? I would refuse all hipsters as a rule. A superb system can speak to get itself, no hype is critical. I would also avoid distributors who are not very forthcoming in having information on the realistic process performance: for instance, they do not profile in their advertising for the slippage and commissions in a natural way. This can have plot consequences as the previous document was meant to show you. Specifically insidious can be ‘non-fill’ slippage occurring in systems involving limit orders. As opposed to typical slippage caused by the use of industry or stop orders, the sort of slippage in question is not constantly easy to estimate and if certainly not accounted for can lead to substantially inflated profits. It can also turn an essentially shedding system into a great looking succeeding one.
I believe that the simply honest way to account for this sort of slippage is by disregarding each of the trades whose entry or perhaps exit prices were not permeated by at least one tick. A strong system will survive this sort of cleansing, a bogus one particular will not. I do this consistently with my systems, yet alas, to the best of our knowledge, no one else will. If you are still wondering why you might like to re-read my previous content. Another issue is typical slippage which should be estimated genuinely depending on the particular market’s ease of purchase and sale.
For instance, this kind of slippage is definitely smaller for a market seeing that liquid as the S&P500 Emini futures (ES) than for any Russell 2000 mini futures (ER2) that also enjoy much popularity among traders. Last but not least, you definitely do not want to overpay for the system. I think nowadays you should be able to invest in a good fully disclosed process for less than $1000. However, nearly all vendors still think that they will afford to charge considerably more. I would avoid them. If a dealer really believes that he possesses a good system that is valued more, he can always crank out a steady income either by utilizing the first option mentioned above as well as by leasing it (option three to be discussed next). Finally, it’s good to see if a vendor offers a refund policy (at least conditional) to get his system. Most probably, so those who do really should, in my opinion, be given priority over the others. You can certainly acknowledge that a vendor who delivers some form of reasonable guarantee features more faith in his technique than a vendor who shuns any idea of such a ensure.
The third option is to hire a system on a monthly or maybe quarterly basis. This is a good solution, but very often not as fine as the previous ones. Choosing a system for trading by doing this requires as much prudence or even more as in the other options, this is because when the year of making use of the system comes to a close you could possibly end up paying much more to the system than you would by purchasing it outright and still get nothing to show for (see the previous article for a sort of a situation like that). It is so, in part if not generally, because the subscription fees are generally absolutely not commensurate with the technique’s actual performance,
so do not overpay. As a rule, I would steer clear of any vendors who fee more than $150 a month. Nearly all of them will hardly ever deliver revenue to your account when all is considered and done and so you need to be frugal as much as possible. Beware however of the common trap: men and women tend to think that if something happens to be expensive it must be good. It is absolutely not true! A supplier who charges $300 monthly for his system might not exactly necessarily deliver greater revenue than one who charges merely $150. The past hypothetical functionality cannot be used as a validation for higher fees.
Most systems are born equivalent every single quarter and the method is only as good as its upcoming quarter and not its prior 5 years. You also need to appreciate that unless a supplier backs up his state of past performance which has a Tradestation performance report, you shouldn’t put much faith in what he claims. However, even with the actual Tradestation report available you’ll still don’t know if the system is not curve-fitted and so you might wind up paying a lot for something which could be performing much even worse than the past performance might indicate. It should not be met with a surprise that this option is quite frequently used by vendors. This is quite simple: they can keep milking you forever, no matter whether these people
deliver or not. Unlike within the first option where the vendor’s fee is tied to your own account’s actual performance or even in the second option where you can obtain a system for life for a 1-time fee (and not only do you need it but even study from it if the system is completely disclosed which is by far the very best deal in this option), within the last option you are hardly ever within the winning position and so the just way to make sure that you do come forward as a winner is to keep your subscription fee is as lower as possible.
Waldemar Puszkarz, Ph. D., is a web expert with 15 years of internet surfing under his seat belt. By training, he is a theoretical physicist, but their interests are much broader compared to science and include trading monetary markets, sports betting, online poker, and researching online business possibilities. He is also an avid guide reader and sports aficionado. Currently, he is making their living mostly as a time trader. He has been in the actual trading trenches for almost ten years during which he has traded a number of financial instruments. He is the proprietor and webmaster of Eminimethods. com which provides free good sense trading education and simple investing systems for e-mini as well as stock markets as well as testimonials of honest online business possibilities in the Meet HOBO portion of his site.