So we had some new neighbors move in to a rental near our place. They’re “retired” @ 40 (of course) and are going to build a mansion in the mountains or some shit. When I ask them what they did before, they: * Used to do commercial photography, then they met a 27 year old millionaire in Vegas who turned them on to a new way to do things * While he won’t say directly (instant red flag) what they did to retire, all he’ll mention is that it involved a 7 week course. * He seems mildly literate in finance, as we discussed recent market moves and some options plays that would have yielded shit tons (AMZN, TSLA, etc) in the last couple of months * Then he moved into the standard “how much do you work a week” angle. I’ll figure it out sooner or later, but so far the only hard angle I’ve got is this “7 week dedicated course.” Anyone know that? He’s also started soft selling several other guys in the neighborhood as well.
Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Swaps* (*But Were Afraid To Ask)
Hello, dummies It's your old pal, Fuzzy. As I'm sure you've all noticed, a lot of the stuff that gets posted here is - to put it delicately - fucking ridiculous. More backwards-ass shit gets posted to wallstreetbets than you'd see on a Westboro Baptist community message board. I mean, I had a look at the daily thread yesterday and..... yeesh. I know, I know. We all make like the divine Laura Dern circa 1992 on the daily and stick our hands deep into this steaming heap of shit to find the nuggets of valuable and/or hilarious information within (thanks for reading, BTW). I agree. I love it just the way it is too. That's what makes WSB great. What I'm getting at is that a lot of the stuff that gets posted here - notwithstanding it being funny or interesting - is just... wrong. Like, fucking your cousin wrong. And to be clear, I mean the fucking your *first* cousin kinda wrong, before my Southerners in the back get all het up (simmer down, Billy Ray - I know Mabel's twice removed on your grand-sister's side). Truly, I try to let it slide. Idomybit to try and put you on the right path. Most of the time, I sleep easy no matter how badly I've seen someone explain what a bank liquidity crisis is. But out of all of those tens of thousands of misguided, autistic attempts at understanding the world of high finance, one thing gets so consistently - so *emphatically* - fucked up and misunderstood by you retards that last night I felt obligated at the end of a long work day to pull together this edition of Finance with Fuzzy just for you. It's so serious I'm not even going to make a u/pokimane gag. Have you guessed what it is yet? Here's a clue. It's in the title of the post. That's right, friends. Today in the neighborhood we're going to talk all about hedging in financial markets - spots, swaps, collars, forwards, CDS, synthetic CDOs, all that fun shit. Don't worry; I'm going to explain what all the scary words mean and how they impact your OTM RH positions along the way. We're going to break it down like this. (1) "What's a hedge, Fuzzy?" (2) Common Hedging Strategies and (3) All About ISDAs and Credit Default Swaps. Before we begin. For the nerds and JV traders in the back (and anyone else who needs to hear this up front) - I am simplifying these descriptions for the purposes of this post. I am also obviously not going to try and cover every exotic form of hedge under the sun or give a detailed summation of what caused the financial crisis. If you are interested in something specific ask a question, but don't try and impress me with your Investopedia skills or technical points I didn't cover; I will just be forced to flex my years of IRL experience on you in the comments and you'll look like a big dummy. TL;DR? Fuck you. There is no TL;DR. You've come this far already. What's a few more paragraphs? Put down the Cheetos and try to concentrate for the next 5-7 minutes. You'll learn something, and I promise I'll be gentle. Ready? Let's get started. 1.The Tao of Risk: Hedging as a Way of Life The simplest way to characterize what a hedge 'is' is to imagine every action having a binary outcome. One is bad, one is good. Red lines, green lines; uppie, downie. With me so far? Good. A 'hedge' is simply the employment of a strategy to mitigate the effect of your action having the wrong binary outcome. You wanted X, but you got Z! Frowny face. A hedge strategy introduces a third outcome. If you hedged against the possibility of Z happening, then you can wind up with Y instead. Not as good as X, but not as bad as Z. The technical definition I like to give my idiot juniors is as follows: Utilization of a defensive strategy to mitigate risk, at a fraction of the cost to capital of the risk itself. Congratulations. You just finished Hedging 101. "But Fuzzy, that's easy! I just sold a naked call against my 95% OTM put! I'm adequately hedged!". Spoiler alert: you're not (although good work on executing a collar, which I describe below). What I'm talking about here is what would be referred to as a 'perfect hedge'; a binary outcome where downside is totally mitigated by a risk management strategy. That's not how it works IRL. Pay attention; this is the tricky part. You can't take a single position and conclude that you're adequately hedged because risks are fluid, not static. So you need to constantly adjust your position in order to maximize the value of the hedge and insure your position. You also need to consider exposure to more than one category of risk. There are micro (specific exposure) risks, and macro (trend exposure) risks, and both need to factor into the hedge calculus. That's why, in the real world, the value of hedging depends entirely on the design of the hedging strategy itself. Here, when we say "value" of the hedge, we're not talking about cash money - we're talking about the intrinsic value of the hedge relative to the the risk profile of your underlying exposure. To achieve this, people hedge dynamically. In wallstreetbets terms, this means that as the value of your position changes, you need to change your hedges too. The idea is to efficiently and continuously distribute and rebalance risk across different states and periods, taking value from states in which the marginal cost of the hedge is low and putting it back into states where marginal cost of the hedge is high, until the shadow value of your underlying exposure is equalized across your positions. The punchline, I guess, is that one static position is a hedge in the same way that the finger paintings you make for your wife's boyfriend are art - it's technically correct, but you're only playing yourself by believing it. Anyway. Obviously doing this as a small potatoes trader is hard but it's worth taking into account. Enough basic shit. So how does this work in markets? 2. A Hedging Taxonomy The best place to start here is a practical question. What does a business need to hedge against? Think about the specific risk that an individual business faces. These are legion, so I'm just going to list a few of the key ones that apply to most corporates. (1) You have commodity risk for the shit you buy or the shit you use. (2) You have currency risk for the money you borrow. (3) You have rate risk on the debt you carry. (4) You have offtake risk for the shit you sell. Complicated, right? To help address the many and varied ways that shit can go wrong in a sophisticated market, smart operators like yours truly have devised a whole bundle of different instruments which can help you manage the risk. I might write about some of the more complicated ones in a later post if people are interested (CDO/CLOs, strip/stack hedges and bond swaps with option toggles come to mind) but let's stick to the basics for now. (i) Swaps A swap is one of the most common forms of hedge instrument, and they're used by pretty much everyone that can afford them. The language is complicated but the concept isn't, so pay attention and you'll be fine. This is the most important part of this section so it'll be the longest one. Swaps are derivative contracts with two counterparties (before you ask, you can't trade 'em on an exchange - they're OTC instruments only). They're used to exchange one cash flow for another cash flow of equal expected value; doing this allows you to take speculative positions on certain financial prices or to alter the cash flows of existing assets or liabilities within a business. "Wait, Fuzz; slow down! What do you mean sets of cash flows?". Fear not, little autist. Ol' Fuzz has you covered. The cash flows I'm talking about are referred to in swap-land as 'legs'. One leg is fixed - a set payment that's the same every time it gets paid - and the other is variable - it fluctuates (typically indexed off the price of the underlying risk that you are speculating on / protecting against). You set it up at the start so that they're notionally equal and the two legs net off; so at open, the swap is a zero NPV instrument. Here's where the fun starts. If the price that you based the variable leg of the swap on changes, the value of the swap will shift; the party on the wrong side of the move ponies up via the variable payment. It's a zero sum game. I'll give you an example using the most vanilla swap around; an interest rate trade. Here's how it works. You borrow money from a bank, and they charge you a rate of interest. You lock the rate up front, because you're smart like that. But then - quelle surprise! - the rate gets better after you borrow. Now you're bagholding to the tune of, I don't know, 5 bps. Doesn't sound like much but on a billion dollar loan that's a lot of money (a classic example of the kind of 'small, deep hole' that's terrible for profits). Now, if you had a swap contract on the rate before you entered the trade, you're set; if the rate goes down, you get a payment under the swap. If it goes up, whatever payment you're making to the bank is netted off by the fact that you're borrowing at a sub-market rate. Win-win! Or, at least, Lose Less / Lose Less. That's the name of the game in hedging. There are many different kinds of swaps, some of which are pretty exotic; but they're all different variations on the same theme. If your business has exposure to something which fluctuates in price, you trade swaps to hedge against the fluctuation. The valuation of swaps is also super interesting but I guarantee you that 99% of you won't understand it so I'm not going to try and explain it here although I encourage you to google it if you're interested. Because they're OTC, none of them are filed publicly. Someeeeeetimes you see an ISDA (dsicussed below) but the confirms themselves (the individual swaps) are not filed. You can usually read about the hedging strategy in a 10-K, though. For what it's worth, most modern credit agreements ban speculative hedging. Top tip: This is occasionally something worth checking in credit agreements when you invest in businesses that are debt issuers - being able to do this increases the risk profile significantly and is particularly important in times of economic volatility (ctrl+f "non-speculative" in the credit agreement to be sure). (ii) Forwards A forward is a contract made today for the future delivery of an asset at a pre-agreed price. That's it. "But Fuzzy! That sounds just like a futures contract!". I know. Confusing, right? Just like a futures trade, forwards are generally used in commodity or forex land to protect against price fluctuations. The differences between forwards and futures are small but significant. I'm not going to go into super boring detail because I don't think many of you are commodities traders but it is still an important thing to understand even if you're just an RH jockey, so stick with me. Just like swaps, forwards are OTC contracts - they're not publicly traded. This is distinct from futures, which are traded on exchanges (see The Ballad Of Big Dick Vick for some more color on this). In a forward, no money changes hands until the maturity date of the contract when delivery and receipt are carried out; price and quantity are locked in from day 1. As you now know having read about BDV, futures are marked to market daily, and normally people close them out with synthetic settlement using an inverse position. They're also liquid, and that makes them easier to unwind or close out in case shit goes sideways. People use forwards when they absolutely have to get rid of the thing they made (or take delivery of the thing they need). If you're a miner, or a farmer, you use this shit to make sure that at the end of the production cycle, you can get rid of the shit you made (and you won't get fucked by someone taking cash settlement over delivery). If you're a buyer, you use them to guarantee that you'll get whatever the shit is that you'll need at a price agreed in advance. Because they're OTC, you can also exactly tailor them to the requirements of your particular circumstances. These contracts are incredibly byzantine (and there are even crazier synthetic forwards you can see in money markets for the true degenerate fund managers). In my experience, only Texan oilfield magnates, commodities traders, and the weirdo forex crowd fuck with them. I (i) do not own a 10 gallon hat or a novelty size belt buckle (ii) do not wake up in the middle of the night freaking out about the price of pork fat and (iii) love greenbacks too much to care about other countries' monopoly money, so I don't fuck with them. (iii) Collars No, not the kind your wife is encouraging you to wear try out to 'spice things up' in the bedroom during quarantine. Collars are actually the hedging strategy most applicable to WSB. Collars deal with options! Hooray! To execute a basic collar (also called a wrapper by tea-drinking Brits and people from the Antipodes), you buy an out of the money put while simultaneously writing a covered call on the same equity. The put protects your position against price drops and writing the call produces income that offsets the put premium. Doing this limits your tendies (you can only profit up to the strike price of the call) but also writes down your risk. If you screen large volume trades with a VOL/OI of more than 3 or 4x (and they're not bullshit biotech stocks), you can sometimes see these being constructed in real time as hedge funds protect themselves on their shorts. (3) All About ISDAs, CDS and Synthetic CDOs You may have heard about the mythical ISDA. Much like an indenture (discussed in my post on $F), it's a magic legal machine that lets you build swaps via trade confirms with a willing counterparty. They are very complicated legal documents and you need to be a true expert to fuck with them. Fortunately, I am, so I do. They're made of two parts; a Master (which is a form agreement that's always the same) and a Schedule (which amends the Master to include your specific terms). They are also the engine behind just about every major credit crunch of the last 10+ years. First - a brief explainer. An ISDA is a not in and of itself a hedge - it's an umbrella contract that governs the terms of your swaps, which you use to construct your hedge position. You can trade commodities, forex, rates, whatever, all under the same ISDA. Let me explain. Remember when we talked about swaps? Right. So. You can trade swaps on just about anything. In the late 90s and early 2000s, people had the smart idea of using other people's debt and or credit ratings as the variable leg of swap documentation. These are called credit default swaps. I was actually starting out at a bank during this time and, I gotta tell you, the only thing I can compare people's enthusiasm for this shit to was that moment in your early teens when you discover jerking off. Except, unlike your bathroom bound shame sessions to Mom's Sears catalogue, every single person you know felt that way too; and they're all doing it at once. It was a fiscal circlejerk of epic proportions, and the financial crisis was the inevitable bukkake finish. WSB autism is absolutely no comparison for the enthusiasm people had during this time for lighting each other's money on fire. Here's how it works. You pick a company. Any company. Maybe even your own! And then you write a swap. In the swap, you define "Credit Event" with respect to that company's debt as the variable leg . And you write in... whatever you want. A ratings downgrade, default under the docs, failure to meet a leverage ratio or FCCR for a certain testing period... whatever. Now, this started out as a hedge position, just like we discussed above. The purest of intentions, of course. But then people realized - if bad shit happens, you make money. And banks... don't like calling in loans or forcing bankruptcies. Can you smell what the moral hazard is cooking? Enter synthetic CDOs. CDOs are basically pools of asset backed securities that invest in debt (loans or bonds). They've been around for a minute but they got famous in the 2000s because a shitload of them containing subprime mortgage debt went belly up in 2008. This got a lot of publicity because a lot of sad looking rednecks got foreclosed on and were interviewed on CNBC. "OH!", the people cried. "Look at those big bad bankers buying up subprime loans! They caused this!". Wrong answer, America. The debt wasn't the problem. What a lot of people don't realize is that the real meat of the problem was not in regular way CDOs investing in bundles of shit mortgage debts in synthetic CDOs investing in CDS predicated on that debt. They're synthetic because they don't have a stake in the actual underlying debt; just the instruments riding on the coattails. The reason these are so popular (and remain so) is that smart structured attorneys and bankers like your faithful correspondent realized that an even more profitable and efficient way of building high yield products with limited downside was investing in instruments that profit from failure of debt and in instruments that rely on that debt and then hedging that exposure with other CDS instruments in paired trades, and on and on up the chain. The problem with doing this was that everyone wound up exposed to everybody else's books as a result, and when one went tits up, everybody did. Hence, recession, Basel III, etc. Thanks, Obama. Heavy investment in CDS can also have a warping effect on the price of debt (something else that happened during the pre-financial crisis years and is starting to happen again now). This happens in three different ways. (1) Investors who previously were long on the debt hedge their position by selling CDS protection on the underlying, putting downward pressure on the debt price. (2) Investors who previously shorted the debt switch to buying CDS protection because the relatively illiquid debt (partic. when its a bond) trades at a discount below par compared to the CDS. The resulting reduction in short selling puts upward pressure on the bond price. (3) The delta in price and actual value of the debt tempts some investors to become NBTs (neg basis traders) who long the debt and purchase CDS protection. If traders can't take leverage, nothing happens to the price of the debt. If basis traders can take leverage (which is nearly always the case because they're holding a hedged position), they can push up or depress the debt price, goosing swap premiums etc. Anyway. Enough technical details. I could keep going. This is a fascinating topic that is very poorly understood and explained, mainly because the people that caused it all still work on the street and use the same tactics today (it's also terribly taught at business schools because none of the teachers were actually around to see how this played out live). But it relates to the topic of today's lesson, so I thought I'd include it here. Work depending, I'll be back next week with a covenant breakdown. Most upvoted ticker gets the post. *EDIT 1\* In a total blowout, $PLAY won. So it's D&B time next week. Post will drop Monday at market open.
Disclaimer: None of this is financial advice. I have no idea what I'm doing. Please do your own research or you will certainly lose money. I'm not a statistician, data scientist, well-seasoned trader, or anything else that would qualify me to make statements such as the below with any weight behind them. Take them for the incoherent ramblings that they are. TL;DR at the bottom for those not interested in the details. This is a bit of a novel, sorry about that. It was mostly for getting my own thoughts organized, but if even one person reads the whole thing I will feel incredibly accomplished.
For those of you not familiar, please see the various threads on this trading system here. I can't take credit for this system, all glory goes to ParallaxFX! I wanted to see how effective this system was at H1 for a couple of reasons: 1) My current broker is TD Ameritrade - their Forex minimum is a mini lot, and I don't feel comfortable enough yet with the risk to trade mini lots on the higher timeframes(i.e. wider pip swings) that ParallaxFX's system uses, so I wanted to see if I could scale it down. 2) I'm fairly impatient, so I don't like to wait days and days with my capital tied up just to see if a trade is going to win or lose. This does mean it requires more active attention since you are checking for setups once an hour instead of once a day or every 4-6 hours, but the upside is that you trade more often this way so you end up winning or losing faster and moving onto the next trade. Spread does eat more of the trade this way, but I'll cover this in my data below - it ends up not being a problem. I looked at data from 6/11 to 7/3 on all pairs with a reasonable spread(pairs listed at bottom above the TL;DR). So this represents about 3-4 weeks' worth of trading. I used mark(mid) price charts. Spreadsheet link is below for anyone that's interested.
I'm pretty much using ParallaxFX's system textbook, but since there are a few options in his writeups, I'll include all the discretionary points here:
I'm using the stop entry version - so I wait for the price to trade beyond the confirmation candle(in the direction of my trade) before entering. I don't have any data to support this decision, but I've always preferred this method over retracement-limit entries. Maybe I just like the feeling of a higher winrate even though there can be greater R:R using a limit entry. Variety is the spice of life.
I put my stop loss right at the opposite edge of the confirmation candle. NOT at the edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. I'll get into this more below - not enough trades are saved to justify the wider stops. (Wider stop means less $ per pip won, assuming you still only risk 1%).
All my profit/loss statistics are based on a 1% risk per trade. Because 1 is real easy to multiply.
There are definitely some questionable trades in here, but I tried to make it as mechanical as possible for evaluation purposes. They do fit the definitions of the system, which is why I included them. You could probably improve the winrate by being more discretionary about your trades by looking at support/resistance or other techniques.
I didn't use MBB much for either entering trades, or as support/resistance indicators. Again, trying to be pretty mechanical here just for data collection purposes. Plus, we all make bad trading decisions now and then, so let's call it even.
As stated in the title, this is for H1 only. These results may very well not play out for other time frames - who knows, it may not even work on H1 starting this Monday. Forex is an unpredictable place.
I collected data to show efficacy of taking profit at three different levels: -61.8%, -100% and -161.8% fib levels described in the system using the passive trade management method(set it and forget it). I'll have more below about moving up stops and taking off portions of a position.
And now for the fun. Results!
Total Trades: 241
TP at -61.8%: 177 out of 241: 73.44%
TP at -100%: 156 out of 241: 64.73%
TP at -161.8%: 121 out of 241: 50.20%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 5.22%
TP at -100%: 23.55%
TP at -161.8%: 29.14%
As you can see, a higher target ended up with higher profit despite a much lower winrate. This is partially just how things work out with profit targets in general, but there's an additional point to consider in our case: the spread. Since we are trading on a lower timeframe, there is less overall price movement and thus the spread takes up a much larger percentage of the trade than it would if you were trading H4, Daily or Weekly charts. You can see exactly how much it accounts for each trade in my spreadsheet if you're interested. TDA does not have the best spreads, so you could probably improve these results with another broker. EDIT: I grabbed typical spreads from other brokers, and turns out while TDA is pretty competitive on majors, their minors/crosses are awful! IG beats them by 20-40% and Oanda beats them 30-60%! Using IG spreads for calculations increased profits considerably (another 5% on top) and Oanda spreads increased profits massively (another 15%!). Definitely going to be considering another broker than TDA for this strategy. Plus that'll allow me to trade micro-lots, so I can be more granular(and thus accurate) with my position sizing and compounding.
A Note on Spread
As you can see in the data, there were scenarios where the spread was 80% of the overall size of the trade(the size of the confirmation candle that you draw your fibonacci retracements over), which would obviously cut heavily into your profits. Removing any trades where the spread is more than 50% of the trade width improved profits slightly without removing many trades, but this is almost certainly just coincidence on a small sample size. Going below 40% and even down to 30% starts to cut out a lot of trades for the less-common pairs, but doesn't actually change overall profits at all(~1% either way). However, digging all the way down to 25% starts to really make some movement. Profit at the -161.8% TP level jumps up to 37.94% if you filter out anything with a spread that is more than 25% of the trade width! And this even keeps the sample size fairly large at 187 total trades. You can get your profits all the way up to 48.43% at the -161.8% TP level if you filter all the way down to only trades where spread is less than 15% of the trade width, however your sample size gets much smaller at that point(108 trades) so I'm not sure I would trust that as being accurate in the long term. Overall based on this data, I'm going to only take trades where the spread is less than 25% of the trade width. This may bias my trades more towards the majors, which would mean a lot more correlated trades as well(more on correlation below), but I think it is a reasonable precaution regardless.
Time of Day
Time of day had an interesting effect on trades. In a totally predictable fashion, a vast majority of setups occurred during the London and New York sessions: 5am-12pm Eastern. However, there was one outlier where there were many setups on the 11PM bar - and the winrate was about the same as the big hours in the London session. No idea why this hour in particular - anyone have any insight? That's smack in the middle of the Tokyo/Sydney overlap, not at the open or close of either. On many of the hour slices I have a feeling I'm just dealing with small number statistics here since I didn't have a lot of data when breaking it down by individual hours. But here it is anyway - for all TP levels, these three things showed up(all in Eastern time):
7pm-4am: Fewer setups, but winrate high.
5am-6am: Lots of setups, but but winrate low.
12pm-3pm Medium number of setups, but winrate low.
I don't have any reason to think these timeframes would maintain this behavior over the long term. They're almost certainly meaningless. EDIT: When you de-dup highly correlated trades, the number of trades in these timeframes really drops, so from this data there is no reason to think these timeframes would be any different than any others in terms of winrate. That being said, these time frames work out for me pretty well because I typically sleep 12am-7am Eastern time. So I automatically avoid the 5am-6am timeframe, and I'm awake for the majority of this system's setups.
Moving stops up to breakeven
This section goes against everything I know and have ever heard about trade management. Please someone find something wrong with my data. I'd love for someone to check my formulas, but I realize that's a pretty insane time commitment to ask of a bunch of strangers. Anyways. What I found was that for these trades moving stops up...basically at all...actually reduced the overall profitability. One of the data points I collected while charting was where the price retraced back to after hitting a certain milestone. i.e. once the price hit the -61.8% profit level, how far back did it retrace before hitting the -100% profit level(if at all)? And same goes for the -100% profit level - how far back did it retrace before hitting the -161.8% profit level(if at all)? Well, some complex excel formulas later and here's what the results appear to be. Emphasis on appears because I honestly don't believe it. I must have done something wrong here, but I've gone over it a hundred times and I can't find anything out of place.
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 5.36%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): -1.01% (yes, a net loss)
Now, you might think exactly what I did when looking at these numbers: oof, the spread killed us there right? Because even when you move your SL to 0%, you still end up paying the spread, so it's not truly "breakeven". And because we are trading on a lower timeframe, the spread can be pretty hefty right? Well even when I manually modified the data so that the spread wasn't subtracted(i.e. "Breakeven" was truly +/- 0), things don't look a whole lot better, and still way worse than the passive trade management method of leaving your stops in place and letting it run. And that isn't even a realistic scenario because to adjust out the spread you'd have to move your stoploss inside the candle edge by at least the spread amount, meaning it would almost certainly be triggered more often than in the data I collected(which was purely based on the fib levels and mark price). Regardless, here are the numbers for that scenario:
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 46.4%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 17.97%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 65.97%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 11.60%
From a literal standpoint, what I see behind this behavior is that 44 of the 69 breakeven trades(65%!) ended up being profitable to -100% after retracing deeply(but not to the original SL level), which greatly helped offset the purely losing trades better than the partial profit taken at -61.8%. And 36 went all the way back to -161.8% after a deep retracement without hitting the original SL. Anyone have any insight into this? Is this a problem with just not enough data? It seems like enough trades that a pattern should emerge, but again I'm no expert. I also briefly looked at moving stops to other lower levels (78.6%, 61.8%, 50%, 38.2%, 23.6%), but that didn't improve things any. No hard data to share as I only took a quick look - and I still might have done something wrong overall. The data is there to infer other strategies if anyone would like to dig in deep(more explanation on the spreadsheet below). I didn't do other combinations because the formulas got pretty complicated and I had already answered all the questions I was looking to answer.
2-Candle vs Confirmation Candle Stops
Another interesting point is that the original system has the SL level(for stop entries) just at the outer edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. Out of pure laziness, I set up my stops just based on the confirmation candle. And as it turns out, that is much a much better way to go about it. Of the 60 purely losing trades, only 9 of them(15%) would go on to be winners with stops on the 2-candle formation. Certainly not enough to justify the extra loss and/or reduced profits you are exposing yourself to in every single other trade by setting a wider SL. Oddly, in every single scenario where the wider stop did save the trade, it ended up going all the way to the -161.8% profit level. Still, not nearly worth it.
As I've said many times now, I'm really not qualified to be doing an analysis like this. This section in particular. Looking at shared currency among the pairs traded, 74 of the trades are correlated. Quite a large group, but it makes sense considering the sort of moves we're looking for with this system. This means you are opening yourself up to more risk if you were to trade on every signal since you are technically trading with the same underlying sentiment on each different pair. For example, GBP/USD and AUD/USD moving together almost certainly means it's due to USD moving both pairs, rather than GBP and AUD both moving the same size and direction coincidentally at the same time. So if you were to trade both signals, you would very likely win or lose both trades - meaning you are actually risking double what you'd normally risk(unless you halve both positions which can be a good option, and is discussed in ParallaxFX's posts and in various other places that go over pair correlation. I won't go into detail about those strategies here). Interestingly though, 17 of those apparently correlated trades ended up with different wins/losses. Also, looking only at trades that were correlated, winrate is 83%/70%/55% (for the three TP levels). Does this give some indication that the same signal on multiple pairs means the signal is stronger? That there's some strong underlying sentiment driving it? Or is it just a matter of too small a sample size? The winrate isn't really much higher than the overall winrates, so that makes me doubt it is statistically significant. One more funny tidbit: EUCAD netted the lowest overall winrate: 30% to even the -61.8% TP level on 10 trades. Seems like that is just a coincidence and not enough data, but dang that's a sucky losing streak. EDIT: WOW I spent some time removing correlated trades manually and it changed the results quite a bit. Some thoughts on this below the results. These numbers also include the other "What I will trade" filters. I added a new worksheet to my data to show what I ended up picking.
Total Trades: 75
TP at -61.8%: 84.00%
TP at -100%: 73.33%
TP at -161.8%: 60.00%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 53.33%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 53.33% (yes, oddly the exact same winrate. but different trades/profits)
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 18.13%
TP at -100%: 26.20%
TP at -161.8%: 34.01%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 19.20%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 17.29%
To do this, I removed correlated trades - typically by choosing those whose spread had a lower % of the trade width since that's objective and something I can see ahead of time. Obviously I'd like to only keep the winning trades, but I won't know that during the trade. This did reduce the overall sample size down to a level that I wouldn't otherwise consider to be big enough, but since the results are generally consistent with the overall dataset, I'm not going to worry about it too much. I may also use more discretionary methods(support/resistance, quality of indecision/confirmation candles, news/sentiment for the pairs involved, etc) to filter out correlated trades in the future. But as I've said before I'm going for a pretty mechanical system. This brought the 3 TP levels and even the breakeven strategies much closer together in overall profit. It muted the profit from the high R:R strategies and boosted the profit from the low R:R strategies. This tells me pair correlation was skewing my data quite a bit, so I'm glad I dug in a little deeper. Fortunately my original conclusion to use the -161.8 TP level with static stops is still the winner by a good bit, so it doesn't end up changing my actions. There were a few times where MANY (6-8) correlated pairs all came up at the same time, so it'd be a crapshoot to an extent. And the data showed this - often then won/lost together, but sometimes they did not. As an arbitrary rule, the more correlations, the more trades I did end up taking(and thus risking). For example if there were 3-5 correlations, I might take the 2 "best" trades given my criteria above. 5+ setups and I might take the best 3 trades, even if the pairs are somewhat correlated. I have no true data to back this up, but to illustrate using one example: if AUD/JPY, AUD/USD, CAD/JPY, USD/CAD all set up at the same time (as they did, along with a few other pairs on 6/19/20 9:00 AM), can you really say that those are all the same underlying movement? There are correlations between the different correlations, and trying to filter for that seems rough. Although maybe this is a known thing, I'm still pretty green to Forex - someone please enlighten me if so! I might have to look into this more statistically, but it would be pretty complex to analyze quantitatively, so for now I'm going with my gut and just taking a few of the "best" trades out of the handful. Overall, I'm really glad I went further on this. The boosting of the B/E strategies makes me trust my calculations on those more since they aren't so far from the passive management like they were with the raw data, and that really had me wondering what I did wrong.
What I will trade
Putting all this together, I am going to attempt to trade the following(demo for a bit to make sure I have the hang of it, then for keeps):
"System Details" I described above.
TP at -161.8%
Static SL at opposite side of confirmation candle - I won't move stops up to breakeven.
Trade only 7am-11am and 4pm-11pm signals.
Nothing where spread is more than 25% of trade width.
Looking at the data for these rules, test results are:
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
I'll be sure to let everyone know how it goes!
Other Technical Details
ATR is only slightly elevated in this date range from historical levels, so this should fairly closely represent reality even after the COVID volatility leaves the scalpers sad and alone.
The sample size is much too small for anything really meaningful when you slice by hour or pair. I wasn't particularly looking to test a specific pair here - just the system overall as if you were going to trade it on all pairs with a reasonable spread.
Here's the spreadsheet for anyone that'd like it. (EDIT: Updated some of the setups from the last few days that have fully played out now. I also noticed a few typos, but nothing major that would change the overall outcomes. Regardless, I am currently reviewing every trade to ensure they are accurate.UPDATE: Finally all done. Very few corrections, no change to results.) I have some explanatory notes below to help everyone else understand the spiraled labyrinth of a mind that put the spreadsheet together.
I'm on the East Coast in the US, so the timestamps are Eastern time.
Time stamp is from the confirmation candle, not the indecision candle. So 7am would mean the indecision candle was 6:00-6:59 and the confirmation candle is 7:00-7:59 and you'd put in your order at 8:00.
I found a couple AM/PM typos as I was reviewing the data, so let me know if a trade doesn't make sense and I'll correct it.
Insanely detailed spreadsheet notes
For you real nerds out there. Here's an explanation of what each column means:
Pair - duh
Date/Time - Eastern time, confirmation candle as stated above
Win to -61.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -61.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -100%? - whether the trade made it to the -100% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -161.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -161.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -61.8% and -100% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -61.8%, but before hitting -100%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -61.8% to -100%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -100% and -161.8% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -100%, but before hitting -161.8%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -100% to -161.8%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Trade Width(Pips) - the size of the confirmation candle, and thus the "width" of your trade on which to determine position size, draw fib levels, etc.
Loser saved by 2 candle stop? - for all losing trades, whether or not the 2-candle stop loss would have saved the trade and how far it ended up getting if so. "No" means it didn't save it, N/A means it wasn't a losing trade so it's not relevant.
Spread(ThinkorSwim) - these are typical spreads for these pairs on ToS.
Spread % of Width - How big is the spread compared to the trade width? Not used in any calculations, but interesting nonetheless.
True Risk(Trade Width + Spread) - I set my SL at the opposite side of the confirmation candle knowing that I'm actually exposing myself to slightly more risk because of the spread(stop order = market order when submitted, so you pay the spread). So this tells you how many pips you are actually risking despite the Trade Width. I prefer this over setting the stop inside from the edge of the candle because some pairs have a wide spread that would mess with the system overall. But also many, many of these trades retraced very nearly to the edge of the confirmation candle, before ending up nicely profitable. If you keep your risk per trade at 1%, you're talking a true risk of, at most, 1.25% (in worst-case scenarios with the spread being 25% of the trade width as I am going with above).
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -61.8% - not going to go into huge detail, see the spreadsheet for calculations if you want. But, in a nutshell, if the trade was a win to 61.8%, it returns a positive # based on 61.8% of the trade width, minus the spread. Otherwise, it returns the True Risk as a negative. Both normalized to the 1% risk you started with.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100% - same as the last, but 100% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -161.8% - same as the last, but 161.8% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100%, and move SL to breakeven at 61.8% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then full TP at 100%.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread take off half of position at -61.8%, move SL to breakeven, TP 100% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you took of half the position and moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then TP the remaining half at 100%.
Overall Growth(-161.8% TP, 1% Risk) - pretty straightforward. Assuming you risked 1% on each trade, what the overall growth level would be chronologically(spreadsheet is sorted by date).
Based on the reasonable rules I discovered in this backtest:
Date range: 6/11-7/3
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
Demo Trading Results
Since this post, I started demo trading this system assuming a 5k capital base and risking ~1% per trade. I've added the details to my spreadsheet for anyone interested. The results are pretty similar to the backtest when you consider real-life conditions/timing are a bit different. I missed some trades due to life(work, out of the house, etc), so that brought my total # of trades and thus overall profit down, but the winrate is nearly identical. I also closed a few trades early due to various reasons(not liking the price action, seeing support/resistance emerge, etc). A quick note is that TD's paper trade system fills at the mid price for both stop and limit orders, so I had to subtract the spread from the raw trade values to get the true profit/loss amount for each trade. I'm heading out of town next week, then after that it'll be time to take this sucker live!
Date range: 7/9-7/30
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 20.73%
Starting Balance: $5,000
Ending Balance: $6,036.51
Live Trading Results
I started live-trading this system on 8/10, and almost immediately had a string of losses much longer than either my backtest or demo period. Murphy's law huh? Anyways, that has me spooked so I'm doing a longer backtest before I start risking more real money. It's going to take me a little while due to the volume of trades, but I'll likely make a new post once I feel comfortable with that and start live trading again.
Hello my fellow young entrepreneurs, I have a challenge for you all today. Basically, I have been working for about 1 year with breaks so about 8 months, and managed to make about 5k in profits, which is equal to the minimum wage in my country, as if I was working full time, while I probably input 2-3 hours daily maximum to this project. My goal, is to outsource, I have been told to try Stocks, try Drop-shipping, try Forex Trading, and I have been wanting to do all these things, but my heart and will doesnt allow me since I believe my capital is not big enough to invest and have a loss. My question for you all today is, how would you use this 5k that I have, and make more of it, I have tried Instagram theme pages, and they take lots of effort (have an account with 2k and growing), I am starting to try tiktok by posting funny videos, I have always liked photoshop, editing, etc. One of my main goals, is to create something that will give me a steady income stream. I will love to have something that can be done, and will function for years to come. A business which is going to be scaleable, hopefully someday earning what I earned in a year, in a couple of months. I appreciate all your help and comments in advance, anything you can help me with I would appreciate it. P.S. If you do help me out, and I ultimately choose your idea to start a new business, and so called business is profitable, you will receive a bonus for your help! Thanks again, and have a nice week!
UPDATE: Told WS what happened and they're going reimburse the forex fees. Thought that was a great gesture! Just wanted to share my experience with Questrade. Decided to move my Canadian stocks from my TFSA to WS trade. Started a transfer through WS which said could take up to 5 weeks. Wanted to transfer my USD to my bank account to avoid WS forex fees. Requested a fund transfer to my bank and was assured by two agents that the funds would arrive in 3 business days. But of course they transferred the USD cash to WS, after I specifically stated for them not too. Funny thing I was I was going to reopen the TFSA and transfer the cash back in anyways. I currently have the rest of my portfolio with QT. I’ve had so many issues with this broker it’s ridiculous. From trying to deny me free trade promo credits to their ineptitude in handling my transfer in requests. Their front end platform is great but they are destitute when it comes to service and support. In the meantime I’ll be looking elsewhere to take my investments. The aggravation, time and effort spent dealing with them has been frustrating beyond comprehension. Seems to be all too common as others on this forum have had similar experiences...
Hi I am quant. I do most of my research in portfolio and risk management techniques and some stuff in high frequency. A lot of people I knew from high school and college have gone off and become "forex traders / stock gurus". They are always asking me for advice even though I mostly work on stuff that's completely separate nor do use technical indicators (unless high frequency), or trade equity for value. And I got frustrated with people asking me if I think this company is overvalued or if I want to make money trading Forex. But I became interested in what they do and more importantly how the make their trading decisions. After speaking to a bunch of people, hopping on zoom with them to see how they "mark up" a graph, and watching their videos I have come to the conclusion that they are using complex trading strategies to "leisurely". But it works for most of the time. The reason why it works it that there are less outlier scenarios in FX than other market. And most importantly there is always liquidity to reduce slippage or the chance that the stop loss doesn't get triggered. In theory the best markets to track using TA are either FX or commodities (probably FX). At first I thought it was funny to talk to these guys, but then it hit me. If I had a market making strategy and followed their trades. I could pick the best prices to provide liquidity at (in my benefit). Here are the problems. The size of these "forex traders" deal flow is probably so small that there ins't that much room for me to make a profit solely reading their future trades and then providing liquidity. But if I paid to be the primary liquidity provider for their retail broker similar to how RobinHood sells trades to give 0 fees, there may be a possibility that the percentage I would get from making the market may be enough. Do you guys think that is possible.
funny to see that subject pop up again. it was what drove me insane enough to find this sub in the first place. at any rate, the problem is not the bots. I thought it was, but those are just part of the parasitic ecosystem. but to get that, first we need to take a few steps back on web history, ad serving, UX, tracking technology and media advertising. too lazy to gather links, but you know, do your googlin'. I assume that most of you are fairly web literate here, but I'll try to go down into the bare bones as much as possible for those who aren't. so let's start with a basic question - what is a web visitor anyway? from the standpoint of a normal person, that would be a person browsing a given website or piece of content. from the standpoint of technology however all you know is that some device has downloaded content from your server using the http protocol. thanks to the wonderful technology of web browsers, you can plant browser cookies on a visitor - stuff that's used to remember if they logged in, what their preferences are, stuff that your service can read from the device. it also serves usually very basic telemetry like last visit time, session time, and so on. this, over time has evolved in what we call browser fingerprinting, a convoluted bunch of technology that allows websites and web services to uniquely identify you. it still doesn't know if you're a human or not, but from the standpoint of the web technology, you're a visitor. now back in ye old days of the web, when the first banner ads were springing up, these were important questions. most consumers were still to be reached on traditional media channels, and ad spend would have to be justified somehow on the risky ventures of online business. so beyond traditional polls that would infer the value of visitors, websites would start tracking number of visitors, time on page and so on. these were used to milk the advertising cow so to speak, and it gave in to some funny developments like the creation of the popup ad - if I recon correctly on geocities, where they would just but the ads everywhere until some big auto company noticed that they're appearing on porn sites. so - put the ad in the popup, and you can claim it's not in the context of porn! around this point in time the online ad business is still pretty low tech. you actually have to call a physical human being, they send you ppts and pdfs, you send back image files and excel sheets, you wire money, the ads run, and so on. this is called direct sales, and it's tracked again by counting a bunch of visitors, and telling you how much impressions and clicks your marvelous creatives and ad budget generated. now enter google - or more precisely, a technology firm called doubleclick that was to be acquired by google. they developed a tool for automatic ad serving, later to be called programmatic advertising, that keeps the pesky sales dude out of the loop and achieves reasonable amounts of scale for a more hefty price - after all, if the sales are automated, you get a bidding war for attention between different advertisers, and you're paying for clicks. so you can see how this was a strategic move for google - they already had the most valuable data available in this situation. they were seeing in real time what people were searching for, and using the programmatic ad serving system, you could effectively bid not just for general attention - but for attention with an intent to buy. ...and the way that google got this data is because they indexed the web, using bots. at least GoogleBot would identify itself as a site visitor, but in the meantime they developed a service for websites to comprehensively track their own visitors and where they were coming from and what they were doing on your website. incidentally, you could also put on google's ads on your webpage to earn quite a bit of money, as content relevant ads would be shown through the doubleclick system. this kicked off two things: one, the ability to classify your website visitors into different clusters and segments allowed businesses to start tailoring the appearance of the website or service to fit that specific audience segment, starting off the great fracture - segmentation of the web (in the sense that two people viewing the same website at the same time were not seeing the same thing) two, it created a very strong financial incentive for people to trick google into thinking they were having actual human visitors that would click on ads, when in fact they were bots. in an even funnier twist, some of them were from browser hijackers, commonly known as malware at the time, which google cross-financed. look up download valley and crossrider. at the cross section of the above two, you had one interesting twist: websites that would appear differently to the security bots or the compliance officers of Google as they would to fake visitors or malware jacked human beings. the former would get a benign looking website, while the latter would get bombarded with auto clicking ads. this kicked off the billion dollar arms race called online advertising fraud. I'm not here to shed a tear for big money corps bleeding money. the real fallout lay somewhere else, but for that you have to understand that you never really saw the real internet, you only saw your corner and the one that was personalized for you. but if you ever had the pleasure of watching daytime TVs or off channels and witnessing the ads, you could kind of infer what kind of audience must be watching these shows generally. from quite clear rip offs to magic number lotteries and television fortune telling, these sorts of programming was aimed at the most gullible, bought for pennies, where the smallest audience portion had to be converted into a money making operation. ...and with audience segmentation and data gathering, that was now possible at unprecedented scale, automatically. so big was the scale in fact, that it gave birth to an entire new beast of an industry called affiliate marketing, where instead of a regular payroll, you'd get a cut of the sale should you figure out an angle on where to push whatever fucking bullshit the vendors were offering to whoever the fuck would be dumb enough to click on an ad and buy. (the funniest story I recall was someone pulling five figures a month because he figured out that if you buy ads on anime-hentai pages and sell PUA shit courses and e-books you'd make a killing) at any rate, affiliate marketing brought with it the killer landing page, the thing that's supposed to hammer the nail in the coffin once you get through the banner ad. the earliest form of deceptiveness in memory comes from various pirate sites, that had fake download buttons as banner ads and virus alerts as the landing pages. but then at some point, some schmuck realized that for certain type of products, like diet pills or forex trading or whatever, the best lander is in fact a fake news page that comes packed with comments and all. that would convert like crazy, because it had the appearance of social proof. until at least the lawsuits came raining down, and these sorts of landing pages and campaigns for being banned left right and centre on all platforms. which just launched a new arms race as the campaigns would be disguised for the bots doing the checkups, and aged facebook profiles would start selling for like 5K USD - these people were making 30-40k a day, they could afford to spend that much to continue running the shop. speaking of facebook - it came just about the right time for the shit to brew max total. first they were unprecedented in the amount of data they were getting off of their users, and they came just in time to catch the full swing of what we call the 'responsive web' - that no user at the same time would see the same thing on their page, it was all allocated through an intricate web of recommendations, running real time, based on previously gathered and forecast behavioral data. it also ran on one simple premise: take over the starting page position from google for most people, then they do not have to justify, ever, any ad spend that takes place on their platform, as long as it performs. furthermore, it was completely lacking any revenue share sort of scheme (save for the short period of facebook gaming, see Zynga), thus there was no incentive for the amount of bot traffic that the previous internet era had bred. instead, it came with an entirely different one - bots that would offer social proof in the way of shares and likes, but would not directly risk the business model, thus giving no incentive for facebook to fight them. (note that google didn't do much jack shit either besides indiscriminately penalizing websites it deemed suspicious when they reached critical payout thresholds) the rest of the story you kind of sort of know. how the obama campaign was brilliant in using the new social media to inspire hope and blah blah blah, kicking the door open for big money politics who could hire the best snake oil salesmen in the market, who had the data and as you can see from the above, had the ethical standards of a shoe. at around 2014-2015 the press (the mainstream media) started to raise question about the duopoly, the buzzword of filter bubbles started appearing, not entirely unrelated to the fact that facebook by this time cannibalized their traffic with a fucking embedded share / like button and started charging money for them to reach their own audience. after 2016 the cries of fake news were everywhere, because there was no online space left which everyone was viewing the same way, and you had no way to verify what the person next to you was looking at. since then, we've all become grandpa yelling at the television set, with nobody around us seeing what we're seeing on the screen, so we're being accused as bots and looking for bots under the carpet. but it's been a long way coming, and the bots are honestly the least of our worries. trust me, I went bankrupt over that one. truth or fake doesn't even begin to describe the magnitude of the problem: more like we entered the phase where every word, event or picture is defined by who ever the fuck wins the auction over it, as the marketers of human attention grind the gears of the money mill without even understanding how fast they're digging towards hell. don't believe me? look around the marketing and advertising related subs these days. the priests are eating the indulgences, and we're only now entering the period of deep fakes, good algo generated audio and good enough NLP. and in the meantime, the shadowrunners running up between two corp headquarter-highrises are skinning your belief systems. so the best you can do is really, not litter the remnants of cyberspace which are not being mined, astroturfed or being pulled apart by the algos. no human connections on a nuclear trash heap mate.
Can you help me to identify a good career to support myself whilst I commit my youth to training to attempt to become a professional boxer?
I realise this is a really long post, there is a TL, DR at the bottom for those that are not interested in the details of my life.
So firstly, some context about me - if you're interested:
Disclaimer: I'm really sorry if I sound incredibly arrogant here, but the truth is I can't be as 'intelligent' as I think I am if I have made as many mistakes as I have in my past to end up where I currently am - just take it as though I’m selling myself for a job interview. I would consider myself to be the absolute definition of a neurodiverse generalist-specialist - in fact when I was 16 (I'm currently 20) my psychology teacher would always refer to me as the "master of all trades" (and despite as flattering as that was, there was obviously an element of hyperbole there). I am fairly autonomous; however, I am also a neophile (and my theory is that this element of myself is the biggest reason for why I am the way that I am). I am either incredibly hyper focused or completely distracted - however I have been working on developing an element of moderation to these two extremes of my character. Just to clarify though, I don't consider myself 'good at everything' - I'm actually usually the WORST at a lot of things when I first begin, and in all honesty the only thing a lot of people I know would say I'm genuinely naturally 'good at' is learning (which I really, really have come to appreciate over the years) - but I wouldn't say I have any 'innate talents' or any 'elite endowments'. For example: I'm not the best at Maths, I don't have a gift for music, I can't speak multiple languages, and I'm not the fastest or the strongest - BUT, despite whatever disadvantages I have, I have always had the supreme confidence that if I really try, and if I really dedicate myself I can reach the top ~5% of most things. In other words, I can at least do the things that don't require talent that will close the gap between myself and those at the most elite level of a particular discipline. I know this isn't unique to me, however it is something that I have had a good comprehension of since I was very young. However, the super-power I discovered is this: if I can reach the top ~5% of most disciplines, then I have the LARGEST advantage in the most multi-disciplinary subjects. The more versatility, variety, and integration a subject requires - the higher and higher I have noticed my potential to be within it (and I will relate this to boxing soon). To vaguely illustrate the point, I spend A LOT of time researching very high level multi-disciplinary subjects such as Bio-Chemistry and Physiology; Neuroscience and its connections to computation, reality, consciousness, and the practical applications of novel cognitive and neural strategies in sports and the acquisition of new 'abilities/skill'; Data science, artificial intelligence, human history, neurobiology, and systems engineering and how they could shape a society better fit for humans, their needs, desires, and purpose etc. etc. etc. I have been employed since the age of 13 and have grew up in a poor part of inner-city Birmingham, UK, from birth. My parents are 'un-skilled labourers' however have had to care for my disabled brother since before I was born, and their opportunities to progress their material conditions were, and still can be, incredibly limited; for these reasons my parents are unable to give me more support than they already do (I appreciate and love my parents a lot; they give me shelter rent free, and are always supportive of me and my ambitions). I've also always worked 'low-skilled', poor rate of pay jobs that require a lot of time investment in order to change my material circumstances: Hair salon cleaner, Fish and Chip shop, Go-kart track race Marshall, and currently I am an apprentice mechanic (21 months into the 36months required to fully qualify) - I also sold weed for some supplemental income when I was 17/18 but those days are behind me.
The 'problem' though, is this:
Despite my attraction to 'novelty' and my history of what appears to be 'commitment issues' - I've finally settled on a path that I am willing to commit my entire youth towards - but I am unable to support myself financially (and therefore at-all) if I am to make the sacrifices I need to make to be serious about this lifestyle. The main problem is time, and the second is money (go figure!). So essentially, where I'd like to be right now is: spending approximately up to 7 hours a day training (preferably most of that time in the mornings), AND saving enough money to where I have options 5-7 years from now if my efforts unfortunately do not pay off. At this point you can see why I'm having difficulty... I'm pretty sure that it's literally everyone's goal ever to earn enough money to depend on, in a minimal amount of time- however I don't need to earn a lot - just whatever is sustainable for the next 5-7 years... as long as I am able to pay for my abstract needs, with some disposable income I will be happy. THE ONLY OTHER CRITERIA is that it just can't be something monotonous. I'm here because I'd still like to develop a career suited for my skills alongside boxing if possible - but if the best case scenario is that I have to just work a minimum wage job for now, it has to be something that allows me to progress into more meaningful work that is more intellectually stimulating. Basically, a part-time job in a field that I’m interested in, where there is a very real possibility of me attaining more skilled and better paying roles.
What makes all of this complicated (sort of):
Due to a lack of personal responsibility, and a past struggle with depression I dropped out of my tertiary education (the step before getting a degree) before I received any qualifications. I do have a very, very exceptional set of secondary education qualifications - but those are only good for FURTHER education and aren't really beneficial when trying to gain employment - at least if I already had some tertiary education qualification(s) it would open up some doors to a set of slightly higher paying jobs that would (with an assumed degree of flexibility) at least enable me to work less hours and be closer to my ideal situation. I'm slightly adverse to going back into education for now, only because it will reduce the amount of time to generate some capital and train at the same time. I actually really would love to go to University (for something like Physiology with Neuroscience), but I don't want to slow down my current progress in Boxing - as time is of the essence and I will reach my biological prime fairly soon. I am fairly certain that whether my boxing career takes off or not, I will almost certainly end up going to university at a later point in my life, just because I genuinely have an interest in attaining a degree, however, as I already stated, I currently do not possess the qualifications to be accepted into University - and gaining those qualifications would also set me back in my boxing progression further. DESPITE THIS, I would be willing to complete a degree apprenticeship (so long as it’s in a field I'd consider a degree in), because I will be able to save money and sort out my finances from now, and only have to slow down my training for the next 3 years (and in all honesty that's at a push) until I'm able to (hopefully) establish a better work-life balance to, again, attain my ideal situation. At this point, I’m expecting to receive replies that will tell me to continue with my apprenticeship - especially because of the fact that I'm more than halfway through - however I will throw some spanners in the works (lol). I am already on a wage that would just about be in that range where I am able to pay for my abstract needs, with some disposable income (which is actually less than NMW here because it's an apprenticeship) - however I have gotten into debt because for the first year I was on an even lower rate of pay that was just not sustainable to meet my needs and therefore I made the sacrifice to accrue some debt, thinking it would be a worthwhile investment. Furthermore I must (and have been) buy(ing) an adequate collection of tools before my apprenticeship ends to retain employment - and tools are not cheap so this further reduces my take home pay (and will continue to do so for the duration of the apprenticeship). Not only that, but once I finish the apprenticeship, I would not like to continue my 40-hour work week - nor would I choose to stay on with my employer. Despite this, there is good potential to be more autonomous and flexible, and earn quite a lot of money by being a self-employed mechanic - but the amount of money I will have to spend to acquire the tools and facilities required to be a profitable mechanic will take me some time, further delaying my progress in boxing. Furthermore, it would be great if I had the knowledge and experience to be a self-employed mechanic, but attaining the qualification is the sole purpose of the apprenticeship - not becoming a good mechanic; I only work on newer models of a certain brand and therefore my exposure to different configurations of mechanisms, and diagnosis and rectification of different issues is limited also, which will make it difficult to have a large enough volume of potential customers to be worthwhile, unless I spend additional time in a 'backstreet' garage. I did have the thought of applying to a 'backstreet' garage and gaining these experiences and knowledge NOW, so that when I do finish, I could potentially have an easier start becoming self-employed - however I have sacrificed the amount of time that I spent being active before and this is what led me to my previous stage of being deeply depressed, and I do not want to make that same mistake again - athletic development really is my self-designated purpose in life. Disclaimer: Obviously I don’t NEED to train extensive hours every day for my mental health - but I DO need to make sure that I do not reach the age of 30/40 with regret wondering what could have been if I was courageous enough to risk it all- that's literally it. I just won't be able to live with myself if I don't at least do everything I can to try to succeed whilst I still have the opportunity. Once I’m beyond my prime, I can deal with spending my time differently, but I wake up with a sense of urgency towards becoming the most athletically developed as I possibly can every morning. I've thought about doing something like Forex or content creation - but I don’t think it's very smart to invest both my plan A and B in risky 'gig economy' style careers. I've also thought about having a career within boxing - however I don't know of any good opportunities other than competing and I'm scared anything else will kill my passion for my desire to compete also. A possibility that I have just recently began playing with though, is to begin creating an online boxing profile for myself on various social media websites - to share high quality videos of my training and performance in the hopes that I may gain a following that will enable me to gain sponsorship(s) of some sort. The only reason I hadn't done this sooner is because I have only just started to attain a level of skill and ability that I feel is 'rare' - I still have so much to work on, and this is my point, that I have no time to waste. A lot of guys will just throw themselves out there too early but, as some of my greatest idols, I follow the philosophy of Mike Tyson and Cus D’Amato - Amateurs should take their time before they start competing (I am only just about to start competing in amateurs, but coronavirus lol) because we want to dominate, and not compete. I know it may seem silly to be so, so, so focused on Boxing as a career - especially when I am not that 'tried and tested' but I know I can't just give up because I haven't yet proved myself to other people. If you've made it this far, I am incredibly impressed by your ability to focus your attention on someone else's self-absorbed first world problems for this long - and I am incredibly thankful that you continued despite my lack of concision and the horrible formatting of this huge boring wall of text. <3 What would your advise be for me?
I have a good history of low-skill employment; (In my opinion) I'm under-qualified for my level of 'intellectual capability' (through no faults other than my own), and I feel like I am already prepared for a higher-skill job - so long as I was given the opportunity to prove my ability - however I am a choosing beggar in the sense that I am trying to create a great work-life balance despite my large demands as to what constitutes 'life'; despite this I'm willing to live frugally for a while in order to make my dream a reality - but do need some disposable income to pay off some debts I have accrued and also to prepare myself financially just in-case I am unable to make my dream of becoming a professional boxer a reality once all is said and done. Therefore, with these circumstances what do you think is the best course of action to reach my ideal situation of: working part-time for (up to) 30 hours a week to begin building a career that will not feel like a form of mental torture due to the monotony of - and one that has good potential to increase earnings without increasing my commitments to work (mainly time) - something that pays me because of the extra value I can provide (funny how hard this seems - not sure if this says something about me hahaha). I have interests in all the sciences (mainly life science, but the STEM and Natural sciences are good too), public health, using tools (as long as they're not as expensive as a mechanic's hahaha), and anything that allows me to be more autonomous and learn about novel things - or at least contribute to the development of knowledge. The only thing I know is that I DO need to make sure that I do not reach the age of 30/40 with regret wondering what could have been if I was courageous enough to risk it all- that's literally it. I just won't be able to live with myself if I don't at least do everything I can to try to succeed whilst I still have the opportunity. Once I’m beyond my prime, I can deal with spending my time differently, but I wake up with a sense of urgency towards becoming one of the best boxers the world has ever seen. Edit: It's funny how one of the first things I mentioned is that I'm a 'generalist-specialist'... and then this whole post is about spreading myself too thin hahaha.
So you wanna trade Forex? - tips and tricks inside
Let me just sum some stuff up for you newbies out there. Ive been trading for years, last couple of years more seriously and i turned my strategies into algorithms and i am currently up to 18 algorithms thats trading for me 24/7. Ive learned alot, listened to hundreds of podcasts and read tons of books + research papers and heres some tips and tricks for any newbie out there.
Strategy - How to... When people say "you need a trading strategy!!" Its because trading is very hard and emotional. You need to stick to your rules at all times. Dont panic and move your stop loss or target unless your rules tell you to. Now how do you make these rules? Well this is the part that takes alot of time. If your rules are very simple (for example: "Buy if Last candles low was the lowest low of the past 10 candles." Lets make this a rule. You can backtest it manually by looking at a chart and going back in time and check every candle. or you can code it using super simple software like prorealtime, MT4 ++ Alot of software is basicly "click and drag" and press a button and it gives you backtest from 10-20-30 years ago in 5 seconds. This is the absolute easiest way to backtest rules and systems. If your trading "pure price action" with your drawn lines and shit, the only way to truly backtest that kind of trading is going in a random forex pair to a random point in time, could be 1 year ago, 1 month ago, 5 years ago.. and then you just trade! Move chart 1 candle at a time, draw your lines and do some "actual trading" and look at your results after moving forward in the chart. If you do not test your strategy your just going in blind, which could be disaster.. Maybe someone told u "this is the correct way to trade" or "this strategy is 90% sure to win every trade!!!" If you think you can do trading without a strategy, then your most likely going to look back at an empty account and wonder why you moved that stop loss or why you didnt take profit etc.. and then your gonna give up. People on youtube, forums, interwebz are not going to give you/sell you a working strategy thats gonna make you rich. If they had a working strategy, they would not give it away/sell it to you.
Money management - How to.... Gonna keep this one short. Risk a small % of your capital on each trade. Dont risk 10%, dont risk 20%. You are going to see loosing trades, your probably gonna see 5-10 loss in a row!! If your trading a 1000$ account and your risking 100$ on each trade (10%) and you loose 5 in a row, your down -50% and probably you cant even trade cus of margin req. Game over.. Now how does one get super rich, super fast, from risking 1-3% of your account on each trade?? Well heres the shocking message: YOU CANT GET RICH FAST FROM TRADING UNLESS YOUR WILLING TO GO ALL IN! You can of course go all in on each trade and if you get em all right, you might get 1000%, then you go all in 1 more time and loose it all... The whole point of trading is NOT going bust. Not loosing everything, cus if you loose it all its game over and no more trading for you.
Find your own trading style.... Everyone is different. You can have an average holding period of 1 month or you could be looking at a 1 min chart and average holding time = 10 minutes. For some, less volatility helps them sleep at night. For others, more volatility gives them a rush and some people crave this. There is no "correct" timeframes, or holding periods, or how much to profit or how much to loose. We are all individuals with different taste in risk. Some dont like risk, others wanna go all in to get rich over night. The smart approach is somewhere in the middle. If you dont risk anything, your not gonna get anything. If you risk everything, your most likely going to loose everything. When people are talking about trading style, this is kinda what that means.
There are mainly 2 ways to trade: Divergence and Convergence. Or in other words: Mean reversion or trend following. Lets talk about them both: Trend following is trying to find a trend and stay with the trend until its over. Mean reversion is the belief that price is too far away from the average XX of price, and sooner or later, price will have to return to its average/mean (hence the name: MEAN reversion). Trend following systems usually see a lower winrate (30-40% winrate with no money management is not uncommon to see when backtesting trend following systems.. You can add good money management to get the winrate % higher. Why is the % winrate so low? Well a market, whatever that market is, tend to get real choppy and nasty right after a huge trend. So your gonna see alot of choppy fake signals that might kill 5-6 trades in a row, until the next huge trend starts which is going to cover all the losses from the small losses before the trend took off. Then you gotta hold that trade until trade is done. How do you define "when trend starts and stops"? Well thats back to point 1, find a strategy. Try defining rules for an entry and exit and see how it goes when you backtest it. For mean reversion the win % is usually high, like 70-90% winrate, but the average winning trade is alot smaller than the average loosing trade. this happens because you are basicly trying to catch a falling knife, or catch a booming rocket. Usually when trading mean reversion, waiting for price to actually reverse can very often leave you with being "too late", so you kinda have to find "the bottom" or "the top" before it actually has bottomed/ topped out and reversed. How can you do this you ask? Well your never going to hit every top or every bottom, but you can find ways to find "the bottom-ish" or "the top-ish", thens ell as soon as price reverts back to the mean. Sometimes your gonna wish you held on to the trade for longer, but again, back to point 1: Backtest your rules and figure that shit out.
Read these 4 points and try to follow them and you are at least 4 steps closer to being a profitable trader. Some might disagree with me on some points but i think for the majority, people are going to agree that these 4 points are pretty much universal. Most traders have done or are doing these things every day, in every trade. Here is some GREAT material to read: Kevin Davey has won trading championship multiple times and he has written multiple great books, from beginner to advanced level. Recommend these books 100%, for example: Building winning algorithmic trading systems" will give you alot to work with when it comes to all 4 of the above points. Market wizards, Reminiscences of a stock operator are 2 books that are a great read but wont give you much "trading knowledge" that you can directly use for your trading. Books on "The turtles" are great reading. Then you have podcasts and youtube. I would stay away from youtube as much as possible when it comes to "Heres how to use the rsi!!!" or "this strategy will make you rich!!". Most youtube videoes are made by people who wanna sell you a course or a book. Most of this is just pure bullshit. Youtube can very harmfull and i would honestly advice about going there for "strategy adivce" and such. Podcasts tho are amazing, i highly recommend: Better systems trader, Chat with traders, Top traders unplugged, We study billionairs, to name a few :) Also, on a less funny note.. Please realize that you are, and i am, real fucking stupid and lazy compared to the actual pro's out there. This is why you should not go "all in" on some blind stupid strategy youve heard about. This is why this is indeed VERY FUCKING HARD and most, if not everyone has busted an account or two before realizing just this. Your dumb.. your not going to be super rich within 1 year.. You can not start with 500$ account and make millions! (some might have been able to do this, but know that for every winner, theres 999 loosers behind him that failed... Might work fine first 5 trades, then 1 fuckup tho and ur gone.. And lastly: Try using a backtesting software. Its often FREE!!! (on a demo account) and often so simple a baby could use it. If your trading lines and such there exists web broweser "games" and softwares that lets you go "1 and 1 candle ahead" in random forex pairs and that lets you trade as if its "real" as it goes. A big backtesting trap however is backtesting "losely" by just drawing lines and looking at chart going "oh i would have taken this trade FOR SURE!! I would have made so much money!!" however this is not actually backtesting, its cherry picking and its biased beyond the grave, and its going to hurt you. Try going 1 candle at a time doing "real and live" trades and see how it goes. Bonus point!! many people misunderstands what indicators like the RSI is telling you. Indeed something is "overbought" or "oversold" but only compared to the last average of xx amounts of bars/candles. It doesn't tell you that RIGHT NOW is a great time to sell or buy. It only tells you that the math formula that is RSI, gives you a number between 1-100, and when its above 70 its telling you that momentum is up compared to the last average 14 candles. This is not a complete buy/sell signal. Its more like a filter if anything. This is true for MOST indicators. They INDICATE stuff. Dont use them as pure buy/sell signals.. At least backtest that shit first! Your probably gonna be shocked at the shitty results if you "buy wehn rsi is undeer 30 and sell when RSI is above 70". Editedit: Huge post already, why not copy paste my comment with an example showing the difference in trend following vs mean reversion: The thing about trend following is that we never know when a trade starts and when it ends. So what often happens is that you have to buy every breakout going up, but not every breakout is a new trend. Lets do an example. Check out the photo i included here: https://imageshost.eu/image/image.RcC THE PHOTO IS JUST AN EXAMPLE THAT SHOWS WHY A TYPICAL TREND FOLLOWING STRATEGY HAVE A "LOW" WINRATE. THE PHOTO IS NOT SHOWING AN EXAMPLE OF MY STRATEGIES OR TRADING.
We identify the big orange trend up.
We see the big break down (marked with the vertical red line) this is telling us we are not going higher just yet. Our upwards trend is broken. However we might continue going up in a new trend, but when will that trend come?
We can draw the blue trend very earyly using highs and lows, lines up and down. Then we begin to look for breakouts of the upper blue line. So every time price breaks upper blue line we have to buy (cus how else are we going to "catch the next trend going up?)
As you can see we get 5 false breakouts before the real breakout happens! Now if you could tell fake breakouts from real breakouts, your gonna be rich hehe. For everyone else: Take every signal you can get, put a "tight" stop loss so in case its a fake signal you only loose a little bit. Then when breakout happens as you can clearly see in chart, your going to make back all the small losses. So in this example we fail 5 times, but get 1 HUGE new trend going further up. This 1 huge trade, unless we fuck it up and take profits too early or shit like that, is going to win back all those small losses + more. This is why trend following has a low winrate. You get 5 small loss and 1 big win. Now lets flip this! Imagine if your trading Mean reversion on all the same red arrows! So every time price hits the blue line, we go short back to the bottom (or middle) again! You would have won 5 trades with small profits, but on that last one you would get stopped out so hard. Meaning 5 small wins, 1 big loss (as some have pointed out in comments, if you where trading mean reverting you would wanna buy the lows as well as short the tops - photo was suppose to show why trend following strategies have a lower % winrate.) Final edit: sorry this looks like a wall of text on ur phones.
22 year old friendship ruined, need your thoughts....
I'd love some perspective on a recent story that's bothering me. Any and all perspectives welcomed. In August last year an old friend (we're 38 now and 16 when we met) had been doing a guidance ritual with his mum who is trained to be a shaman… she gave him LSD as part of the ritual- and I haven't tried it so I don't know what it's like. Anyway, for some reason I contacted him out of the blue the next day when he was still feeling some of the effects. He told me that he loved me, probably always had and it had been a long time coming. I was really surprised, but it was lovely. On some level I'd always felt like that about him (I denied it a lot over the years) but really didn't think that he would ever say or feel something like that. In that convo he said I'd make a great girlfriend and he'd be lucky to have me, I was really smart and lovely but intense and opinionated. Also, that ironically he thought he'd missed his one chance at happiness with me (you can understand the ironically part when you know the backstory). He said I was beautiful and he was stupid for not being completely in love with me. He said he was sure we'd known each other in past lives. I was very touched by all of this because I adore him but I took it with a pinch of salt, and tried to find out if it was just a fleeting feeling. But he also said that his life is on a dark path, and that in this lifetime he is only meant to suffer, maybe he'll be dead by 50 and we should see each other in the next life. He said he has huge issues (lots of drink and drugs of many types), is also very intense, and I'd never be able to handle the up and down of his lifestyle. I got the feeling that he was having those thoughts about loving me for the first time right then, so I asked him if he’d felt like that before, or just that night. And he said he’d thought it the last time we spoke when I’d interviewed him for a book a couple of years previously. But I didn’t get the impression he’d really felt like that when we were younger. I checked a month or 2 later if he remembered what he said because I thought maybe he had just been high. He said he thought he remembered everything he had said, and said I wasn't very nice for not believing him, so I was really happy and decided to go and see him. Fast forward a couple months to after Christmas - I hadn't been to see him yet- but we’d been messaging and sending photos. For Christmas, his mum had bought him a tarot card reading with a chocolate ritual with a shaman or a psychic lady, and he was sharing with me that he'd done it and that it said his head was really messed up. He seemed quite upset. So me being 5% moron, my nervousness and excitedness had returned (I was always very, very nervous around him when we were young) and I made a joke he really didn't appreciate, offering to shoot him in the head if he wanted (I was trying to lighten the mood, and also we seemed to be getting a bit more gentle, intimate and less jokey in the way that we were talking to each other, which freaks me out. He's much sweeter than he used to be, and it kind of makes me freeze up a bit). Well! Bang. It was like I stabbed him in the chest or something. It seemed to instantly remind him of all the things that annoy him about me, and after 5 months being really sweet he went cold on me. Really, really cold. From there I got very confused and kept making worse mistakes because I got nervous, and kept trying to fix it. I sent him some long, weird email which I’m sure made things worse. I also posted something on Facebook which made it look like I was chatting to other guys. All very silly. It's ridiculous. I'm an adult and am pretty confident these days. But suddenly I was really nervous again feeling like a kid and like there’s something terribly wrong with me. I arranged to go and see him for a few days in Tenerife, and before I went it was pretty tense between us and I couldn't tell if he wanted me to go or not- I did everything I could to try and find out if he actually wanted me to go or not- but he was his usual tight-lipped self. When I got there, he was very hospitable, apologized for being off-radar and showed me round, we went out to bars and the beach... We spent four days (before he had to go home to England) as a quasi-couple, and it was a very surreal experience. It was bizarrely intimate, sweet but tense, with someone I know very well... naked. For the first time I realised how peace-loving and gentle he is- which I never saw before. He can't stand a lot of the more boisterous things I do, which is fair, but ironically they're things I tended to do from nerves and trying to get his attention. I kind of got it after that- why he finds me so aversive sometimes, it's like we're stuck in a negative feedback loop, and he thinks I’m too harsh for his delicate constitution. Which, he might just be right about. In between the fun, laughing, joking, drinking, sex and bonding- of which there was lots and it was really nice - he was filled with sadness and depression, grumpiness, and a funny attitude from him that seemed to shout: "yuck, it's you, you're more like a sisteannoying irritation than a woman to me." He said that it was because his life was falling apart- and he was obviously very very depressed but trying to show me a good time and doing a good job of it too, I might add. But so many things pointed to the fact that he mainly just felt annoyed by me, found me totally unsuitable, and kind of pitied me, rather than feeling any love for me, and that he finds me generally very annoying. Wall up, blinds closed, aint comin' in. He also kept telling me about his lifestyle of drink and drugs and how everyone he knows is a junky or a crazy person. It felt like he was trying very hard to make me see reality and put me off him, or save me from him, or warn me, or see how I would react and if I would run. Or save himself from what he sees as inevitable hostility and rejection (as well as from me and how annoying I am). "Be careful what you wish for" and "curiosity killed the cat" seemed to be his repetitive catchphrases when I showed an interest in him. Apparently, his ex thinks he's a bastard, he would tell me. I think, ideally, if he could change me (he used to talk a lot about me doing DHT to rebalance myself) he would want to be in a relationship, because we enjoy each other’s company. But it could only work if he was tougher and I was less harsh. I think he sees these things quite clearly as they are – that he’s got a delicate constitution, and I’m far too frustrated by him to be delicate enough for things to work out. I’d soon get pissed off and ditch the situation, rather than sweep things under the rug and carry on from day to day in a carefree world of consumption- I just couldn’t do that. I’m a strategic future-planner. At one point we played some intimacy/trust game with lots of questions, and he loosened up a little... but the way he would answer questions like "Name 3 things you like about your partner" was like "well you ARE very caring" in the same way that someone might say "Well, Hitler WAS very spiritual." It's funny because in relationships I'm very soft in general, in recent years, but I do still get very harsh and frustrated when problems don’t seem solvable. But with him I just can't seem to relax and trust him enough to be soft with him at all, and he didn't give me a chance anyway. We just don’t trust each other- we’re not safe for each other. After I went home he checked in with me a couple times, which I liked. He tried to share some things with me that interest him, about quite spiritual or unusual subjects (trees being interconnected, aliens having been involved in human development, DHT, the memory of water… stuff that as someone who studied physics I don’t normally hear about, but I’m pretty open to hearing about them)- he's very soft and very chilled- doesn’t like stress at all. But every time I tried to dig a bit deeper and engage with him to see what it was about them that interested him - he completely ignored me. Didn’t try, nothing. Me trying to talk with him about the things he shared seemed to send the walls up and just bug him. Really really frustrating. It's like I couldn't do anything right. Particularly frustrating when he said he was trying to open up my mind- but then wouldn't connect or follow through. So, for a couple months, for the first time in 20 years I seemed to be chasing him. It's like he promised me something, judged me for being nervous and "annoying" and not perfect, and then instead of being understanding, he ran. Yikes. Eventually I got so confused I sent him screenshots of the conversation where he'd said he loved me and he didn't even remember it! He was shocked, blamed it on the drugs and mental illness saying that he was "not a well person." He said he was beginning to get the feeling that he'd "annoyed me" now, and that he sees me as a friend, and he didn't mean to piss me off. Then he changed the subject. He finished up that conversation by saying "we're on different paths and in different places", and he needs to sort himself out and that's that. The backstory goes like this… The first year we knew eachother he nicknamed me “TT” which meant “no tits and no teeth” (I had big gaps before I had braces). He used to do things like hit me on the butt with a stick and then I’d punch him and go nuts. He really took the piss out of me with his friends and girlfriends because I had a huge crush on him (he thought it was hilarious that I felt like I’d been struck by lightning when I first saw him). They used to put me on speakerphone and laugh. He was the only guy I ever asked out – which I did on his answer machine!! Ugh. So, yeah, really humiliated me actually and I’ve never asked anyone out since (thank goodness I’m a woman, haha). After that I had braces and turned into a social person who had lots of parties and friends. He started being really nice to me. But I didn’t forgive him very easily, and we had a big bust up and weren't friends for a year or so. I did a pizza leaflet with his phone number on it. And I banned him from my 18th birthday party to which all our friends were going, and he was pretty upset. I felt bad once when I saw him outside one of my parties on the curb holding his head in his hands saying “why does she hate me so much?” Well, deep down I loved the guy, but he’d humiliated me, so I guess there was a thin line between love and hate. I don’t know if that would have made him feel any better, but hopefully. From some point on, we made up and we always had great chemistry after that... we did things like hanging out and smoking some weed in his car together with other people, going out in London with our mutual friends, him giving me lots of lifts home from pubs and friends houses, me driving his car drunk and pretending I was going to crash it to wind him up (that was stupid and irresponsible). Looking back I think he kind of liked me at that point but was scared of me, didn’t know how to make a move as I had moved on and had given him such a hard time, but at the time I really didn't have a clue whether he liked me or not, I was always just very, very feisty and energetic around him (after all the humiliation I guess) so I could never be calm. Then we went to the same uni town, texted constantly for a year, and even then he said he thought we’d known each other in past lives. To my friends I gave him the nickname "my future husband", he asked me out in the cutest way by saying that if I had the guts and the inclination to go out with him, then we should go for a drink. I was soooo excited.. Well, we almost went out and then he dropped out of uni because of an argument with a lecturer or something. I honestly believe everyone has to follow their own path, so for me it was just sad for him that he had so much stress, and it was disappointing about the date. Our first kiss was when he came up to the uni town again and we did a pub crawl, and he seemed to want to go and sit somewhere and be sweet but I was too nervous so we just kept doing the pubcrawl and ended up spooning on a friend’s floor (just hugging and kissing). We almost went on a date in our home area but he cancelled without suggesting an alternative, and I got annoyed so he stopped talking to me- surprisingly easily- it’s like he has a very low threshold for any kind of angst, and isn’t able to soothe himself or the other person, so just bails. Which, considering the fact that he creates a lot of angst-provoking situations means that he kind of expects to go through life without facing any consequences for his actions. Pretty frustrating for someone like me, who expects quite a lot of openness and honesty. We eventually hooked up once and he never called me after so after waiting for a while, I reluctantly moved on and ended up with someone else for 4 years. I have no idea how he felt about this, but a couple of small things surprised me and I wondered if he had actually felt more than I gave him credit for. I mean, that love confession blew me away, I wouldn't have thought for a moment that he had been harbouring any thoughts like that about me, I thought for him it was all a big joke and meant nothing, so maybe he did feel something other than annoyance for me when we were younger. It's hard to tell as he's been with a lot of women, is very tight-lipped and doesn’t put himself on the line, or take any risks at all. But in those days I was always so nervous around him that any signs would have just gone completely under the radar anyway. A few years later, after lots of traveling, he popped up working in the office down the hall from me at this random summer job I took and we started emailing lots. He seemed disappointed with how life was not as exciting as he'd expected. Then he disappeared one day- he was living with his ex at the time (very lovely girl) and I was with the same guy (the 4 year one). A few years after that we were back hanging around in the same social circle until everyone, including him, moved abroad, and eventually, so did i. It was funny, I would always be able to talk to him if I was upset about, say, moving to uni or something. It didn't happen often but a couple of times. Most of this he probably wouldn't even remember because I think he's been with a lot a lot of girls. He has low self-esteem, apparently. He thinks he has bad luck with women even though women adore him (he's exceptionally easy on the eyes. He’s beautiful actually)- and according to a mutual friend of ours, when he was a teenager he always worried that no decent women would want someone like him. Recently (in the past 15 years, which isn’t so recent, lol) we didn't really hang out much but we became more normal adults. I went down quite a dry academic path and got a BSc in physics with astrophysics and an MSc in clinical research, and ended up stuck in a corporate job I hated until I quit to become a writer, whereas he had more balls than me and did what he wanted much earlier- becoming an entrepreneur trading stock, gold, Forex, imports and exports... at times making a fortune and at other times going bust and beating himself up for it, but always finding something new to try, which I think's pretty damn cool (but try convincing him of that). It's pretty normal for entrepreneurial people to have ups and downs in their success-levels I think, but he seems to judge himself very harshly. The last couple of years he’s been making more money than I’ve ever been able to shake a stick at! I really don’t think he should feel ashamed at all (which he seems to), I think he should feel proud that he’s so dynamic. Good for him. He’s awesome. The only thing I wish is that he had heavy enough emotional armor that he could deal with more difficult situations without bailing. Anyway. Over the years I stopped being super into him and we had a nice, pretty normal friendship -we chatted sometimes on messenger and would always have nice chemistry when we saw each other. He's been trying to arrange a visit for about 10 years or so between the various countries we've been living in (we're both expat people and he wanted to come see me in Madrid and Amsterdam when I lived there, then he wanted me to go seem him in Tenerife for a few years) and I've avoided it, as although I wanted to see him I was scared of a casual fling with him as it’s not what I wanted, and I really don’t like that kind of thing anyway (tried it once or twice thinking I could handle it and I was being all “modern” and cool and everything – because I think I’m a bit old fashioned deep down - but I got emotionally attached and then end up hurt. So now I accept myself for who I am- someone who doesn’t really like flings or casual stuff, but someone who is into monogamy. Whoops! How very boring and unfashionable, and I don’t give a shit. Rayyyy for the love. Whoop whoop.). A couple years ago I interviewed him for a book I wrote about ADHD entrepreneurs. His lifestyle was pretty cool making a lot of money through affiliate marketing and living near the beach in hot sunny Tenerife in an apartment with a pool. But he seemed to think that he sucked for some reason (everyone else seems to think it's pretty darn cool). He said that when he grew up he was under a lot of pressure and that it seemed to have messed up his head. He said that to do well in life you need to do what you want to do, because if you listen to other people you are only going to be messed up. When he was on LSD he said that he had thought he loved me during that interview. This year, his life as an expat abroad basically fell apart as the affiliate marketing scheme crashed and he had to move home to live with his parents, which has brought him really, really down into depression. He said he keeps being told he is going to end up working in McDonalds, and being reminded of the fact that he’s almost 40, and this seemed to be weighing on his mind. It sounds like a lot of pressure. But anyway, for about 5 months after the conversation when he was on LSD he opened up to me, and he was really lovely to me. It was so nice. I guess it was because I was more relaxed and the main thing I wanted was to check up on him and see that he was ok. I didn’t have an agenda to see if he would be a match for me or anything like that- I was just really worried about him. So maybe he felt safe enough to relax. I said that I always imagined that we would end up as platonic roommates when we were 50 and I would make him sandwiches and listen to all his funny antics – which he thought was cute. Actually, I really did like that idea- because it would take away the underlying obligations that a relationship brings that we couldn’t deliver for each other. And friendship is what relationships turn into anyway. For my part, it's really disturbed my sleep for months since I came back from visiting him. Now after trying to message in a friendly way during the coronavirus quarantine (er, I am very very bored) and being annoyed by his total lack of supportiveness, I've recently just told him that I don't want to be friends any more. Too painful. He says I have anger issues and I think he sees himself as an innocent victim. Actually, if I'm honest, I've been pretty angry at a lot of people for a few years, so, maybe he has a point. I guess I'm being a bit selfish. It's not really fair expecting anything from a self-confessed depressed, unwell person. He's "in his pit of despair" as he calls it for 6 months and he has zero interest in me. I'm utterly irrelevant to him. He's snippy, rude, ignores me, and then seems to offer a little bit of an olive branch in the smallest of ways. Excuse the really long story, would be interested in any insight people have on this situation, particularly with respect to how you think he feels and why he acts the way he does. If I feel like I understand this situation then hopefully I can stop thinking about it, because for the past 10 years I've just had the odd nice thought every now and then about him- and would like that to become the status quo again.
Honest Question: Is the high watermark feature working in the GVT platform?
I was looking at Nikolay's 'ForexDailyTrading' program. On 2020-02-13 12:45:38 the manager closed the period on a loss of about -23%. On 2020-02-14 14:52:10 the manager closed the subsequent period on a profit of about +0.15%. The funny part is that the platform charged both Manager success fee and Platform success fee. Shouldn't the platform charge no fees until the program recovers the previous losses?
The crypto market’s correlation with traditional markets (by Robert Aron Zawiasa)
https://medium.com/@Zawiasa/the-crypto-markets-correlation-with-traditional-markets-79e8209a6d8 At the time of Corona virus and the — not so related — economic meltdown, many questions the correlation between the virtual economy of cryptocurrencies and the “trad” one. Why is it such an important question? For many years crypto evangelists predicted Bitcoin as a new safe-haven, the “digital gold”. — Oh boy, they were wrong. The correlation is not imaginary, trad market players now have significant capital in cryptocurrency and when they need to pull liquidity to cover fiat liabilities, they just do it. The reason for the steep drop in % terms is because the BTC market is not liquid enough at this point in time. Is it a problem? A heresy of the crypto evangelion? A heresy for sure, but not a problem at all. Let’s be honest and admit it: The crypto community found nothing unusual in the recent price-drops. I, myself even shorted the market, because crypto is still full of promises but lacking adoption.
Okay, so they are correlating and crypto is full of shit and scammy and basically the same, right?
Not so! Do you remember the times when we had to wait days for a transaction? Paying with wire transfer for something in China was insanely expensive? When merchants preferred cash over credit cards, because of high fees? When you had to hire a broker for investing? Those times are gone and yes, not because of crypto solved these problems, but crypto definitely accelerated this transformation, urged the financial world to change rules or die. Now what if I say, this is only the beginning and these are only entry-level benefits of what really crypo promises?
Crypto promises us the “digital America”
Uh, I said it. Crypto is the new land and all the resourceful wants their own pieces of it. The reason behind why so many are thinking about Bitcoin as the digital gold is because the digital America’s gold rush is happening now. We all know deep in our consciousness that the world is heavily changing, the youth is changing, society is being digitalized even if brain-computer interfaces are not a thing yet..
Damn son you are weird and I stopped reading here.
The reason you feel weird about our descendants living online is because you know it will happen, but stay in the present now and I will tell you what crypto is doing to our traditional economy!
What is the “crypto dream”?
Many of the early adopters joined not because they wanted to make money, but because they think the current money system is unfair. Common citizens are paying the highest on almost everything and most of the time they don’t know about it. The financial sector’s practices are so hidden, almost like an occult knowledge. There are a few people who understand it and then there are everyone else, the vulnerable. This makes the first statement of the dream:
Financial systems should be transparent.
One of my biggest frustration as a teenager was I did not see real good opportunities in the world. I read about them, I saw them in historical movies, but in reality workplaces were boring and abusive, investments were only for the rich. Neither the booming housing market or fake forex trading seemed like a good fit for me. I had very little money, but a big passion to forge my fortune.
Opportunities should be there for everyone.
The wolves of Wall Street created our current system in the ideology of “I own what I could acquire” and backfired each other just like everyone did. They have done this, because there is no trust in the traditional world, but trust is heavily needed. But if things are transparent and open, we only need one more thing to wake up from this nightmare:
Cooperations should work without trust.
You read it right, a trustless environment provide uncheatable cooperation. There is no single entity that has authority over the system, and consensus is achieved without participants having to know or trust anything but the system itself.
I don’t eat your utopian bullshit! Your software is written by people I still need to trust.
People tend to be happier to direct trust towards organizations than systems. However, while organizations are made up of people who are easily corruptible, trustless systems can be governed entirely by computer code. All of the source code in crypto should be accessible to everyone. If it is not, then it is not a part of our ecosystem.
The technology behind crypto
Many being confused about the blockchain, thinking it is not a big deal. We had many software far older than Bitcoin, implementing the very same ideas. What Bitcoin had — which made the blockchain a very unique thing — is philosophy. It was intended to use a special way and confronted a very big thing, nobody thought it could be possible to confront. The blockchain is a way to store information. A decentralized, fully transparent one, which is accessible for everyone 7/24. It never stops, It cannot be stopped and people make it doing different things. The first use case its inventor made it doing is persisting transactions, money transfers. He told all of us it is just an experiment, which he didn’t tell is the capabilities of this technology. So fast people realized it is possible to do extraordinary things with it, like running a whole computer on the blockchain, making it behave like a virtual computer instance. No one did things like this before: A global computer which cannot be stopped, which is capable to run all kinds of software on it.
What was the impact?
People go mad about it, especially greedy people who don’t know a bum about the technology but have money to pour in. At one point, the fundraising softwares running on the Ethereum global computer had more impact and volume than the whole VC industry in America. This was only the early rising of crypto, 2017 spring. Later that year, everyone hopped on the train who were brave or stupid enough. Did crypto had a real economy at that point? Was it an industry? Real-world adoption? NOPE It was a bitter funny hype train, challenging everyone inside or outside the community, but it showed us one thing: We have the gold. Not so much people are capable to find and extract gold, to be honest: Most of us are just lurkers, fortune hunters and times could be rough when a mass hype destructs all the mines, but people had keep going, continuing the work.
How the crypto economy relates to the traditional economy now?
It is expanding much faster than any other economy in the world. Our frontiers in adoption are companies like Crypto.com paying hundred millions of dollars ($50 bonus for every new customer) to onboard millions of users, others like Coinbase paying $166 anyone to motivate in learning about cryptocurrencies. Handshake is airdropping hundreds of dollars (on current rates) to open-source developers and these are just a few examples of how generous and prosperous our thriving world is. In comparison: Revolut, a fintech company which is very similar to Crypto.com only paid 10 USD for new card holders and no one would ever pay you to educate yourself about financials. Developers? They historically get a fraction of a fraction of the pie in Silicon Valley. (Sorry Y Combinator, you are a delightful exception) These companies I mentioned are very traditional ones and they are not innovating in software, but keeping our gates open to the new world. I don’t want to credit here any of the thousands of developer teams, all working on the “real deal”. I only leave here a link to the list of all variants of the Bitcoin source code alone. Understanding what blockchain companies are working on is a whole new profession now. The idea of a crypto company is the DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). Which covers trustless, often anonymous and fully transparent organizations with profit sharing and they are aimed to become better alternatives to traditional companies. Most of us in the community have different understanding, proposals and hopes about what a DAO should be, but common sense tell us it is the next big thing to emerge.
Wild West is Happening
We are building railway systems across the land, making connections and interoperations between blockchains. We are attracting a lot of immigrants day-to-day, because we have better paying workplaces, better interest rates and in overall a flourish economy. We are growing a strong identity to support our nation as the blockchain developers, economists, philosophers and investors. Our money is under our control as we own our future and all of us knows: We will soon show the world, what we are capable to achieve. This is my view of the crypto world. This is the manifesto of “digital America”. RAZ contact me at zawiasa.hu
Wall Street Week Ahead for the trading week beginning May 27th, 2019
Hey what's happening wallstreetbets! Good morning and happy Saturday to all of you on this subreddit. I hope everyone made out pretty nicely in the market this past week, and are ready for the new holiday-shortened trading week ahead. Here is everything you need to know to get you ready for the trading week beginning May 27th, 2019.
Trade and the economy have become the new roller coaster for markets - (Source)
Trade headlines could be a big factor for markets in the week ahead, but investors will also be attuned to fresh inflation data and moves in the bond market, which is flashing new worries about the economy. Stocks were on a roller coaster ride in the past week, as markets reacted to worsening trade tensions and concerns that negotiations could be prolonged, causing pain for the global economy. But the bond market’s move was perhaps even more dramatic, as yields, which move opposite of price, fell to levels last seen in 2017, and the futures market began to price in three Fed interest rate cuts by the end of next year. “There’s not a lot of economic data next week, so events hang over us,” said Marc Chandler, chief global strategist at Bannockburn Global Forex. “It’s more about the evolution of old issues than new issues, like trade and Brexit.” Brexit will continue to be a focus in global markets. U.K. Prime Minister Theresa May stepped aside Friday after failing to get agreement on a plan for the U.K. to leave the European Union. Chandler said investors will be watching the jockeying among candidates hoping to succeed Prime Minister May, with hard line Brexit proponent Boris Johnson expected to seek the job, among others. As for trade, Chandler said it’s possible that President Donald Trump’s comments that Huawei could be part of a trade deal may be the start of a new approach by the administration to tone down its rhetoric. The telecom giant has been blacklisted by the U.S. and is expected to be denied access to U.S. components for its equipment. “In some ways, it’s a headline problem. We think of it more as event risk,” said Nadine Terman, CEO and CIO at Solstein Capital. “China thinks in dynasties and U.S. investors seem to think in durations of days and months, so I think we are misunderstanding the duration of their negotiating strategy.” She said the issues between the two countries go way beyond trade and extend to China’s military aspirations in the South China Sea and its global campaign of influence through the Belt and Road initiative, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s signature program. “It’s now become more nationalistic, emotional, to say: ‘We’re going against the U.S. and we’ve got to be in it for the long haul.’ I don’t think you have the same emotion here in the U.S. You don’t have the same nationalistic pride to say ‘we have to fight China at all cost,’” she said. In the past week, Wall Street increasingly began to expect the Trump administration to turn up the pressure on China with another wave of 25% tariffs on the $300 billion or so in goods remaining that have no tariffs. Those tariffs would directly hit American consumer goods and are expected to take a bigger bite out of the economy. Fears of a trade war hurting global growth and concerns that the U.S. is already beginning to weaken were evident in the bond market. Treasury yields reflected lowered growth expectations. The 10-year hit a low of 2.29% on Thursday and was at 2.32% Friday. J.P. Morgan economists Friday downgraded their view of the economy, slicing second quarter growth to just 1% from an earlier forecast of 2.25% and first quarter growth of 3.2%. The economists blamed weak U.S. manufacturing data and said risks were signs of weakness in the global economy and also indications that the trade war was hurting business sentiment. “The concerns the markets have right now are that we’re moving towards a worst case scenario, and that could persist for quite some time,” said Mark Cabana, head of U.S. short rate strategy at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. “If that’s the case, then the market is believing economic data, and the Fed will likely need to respond to that by trying to offset and prevent a recession.” The most important data point in the coming week will be Friday’s personal consumption expenditures, which includes the PCE deflator inflation data that the Fed monitors. It was at 1.6% year-over-year last month, and is expected to be the same for April, well below the Fed’s target of 2% inflation. Inflation has become a key focus on Wall Street, particularly after Fed Chair Jerome Powell said low inflation appears to be transitory and not enough of a concern to make the Fed cut interest rates. Powell and other Fed officials have stressed the Fed is pausing in its rate hiking cycle, is monitoring the economy and does not yet know which way it will move next. Solstein Capital’s Terman said she is watching the PCE inflation report to see if it confirms her view that inflation and the economy will be weaker this summer. She also expects the markets to be choppy, and by late summer, around its annual Jackson Hole symposium, the Fed could indicate it could cut interest rates. “People are going to start getting even more concerned this summer about the U.S.,” Terman said. Terman said she has been positioned for lower inflation and slower GDP growth with key holdings in utilities, REITs, Treasurys and gold. “What would do well this summer? Staples, utilities, health care, REITs. You want fixed income. You want to be underweight tech, energy, financials and industrials,” she said. There is also home prices data Tuesday and advanced economic indicators Thursday. That comes in addition to a few earnings reports, including Costco, Ulta Beauty and Dollar General. Markets will also be watching the outcome of European parliamentary elections, and if there is a strong showing by populists, there could be a negative impact on the euro and risk assets.
This past week saw the following moves in the S&P:
Our office will be closed for observance of Memorial Day on Monday, May 27. U.S stock and bond markets will also be closed. As you spend some quality time off with family and friends please take time to commemorate those who have paid the ultimate price while serving in the U.S. military. For decades the Stock Trader’s Almanac has been tracking and monitoring the market’s performance around holidays. The trading day after Memorial Day has a mixed record going back to 1971. Both S&P 500 and NASDAQ have declined more often than risen on the day, but average performance is still positive. Since 1986, the frequency of gains has improved, and average performance has also risen however, over the last four years S&P 500 has declined. The second trading day after Memorial Day has since more advances than declines, but average performance is negative for NASDAQ. The third day after appears to have the best long- and short-term record combined with solid average performance.
Hut, Hut, Cut! With weaker economic data to contend with this week on both a domestic and international basis, plus escalating tensions between the US and China, investors are increasingly pricing in a higher likelihood of rate cuts from the FOMC before the year is out. Through mid-day Friday, the Fed Fund futures market was pricing in over an 85% chance of a rate cut between now and the January 2020 meeting. Those are the kind of odds that would make James Holzhauer say "All in."
Investors just got more details on Federal Reserve (Fed) policymakers’ views of inflation. Minutes of the Fed’s most recent meeting, which ended May 1, showed that “many participants” considered slowing consumer inflation as “transitory,” and agreed that the Fed’s current patient approach should help stoke economic growth and inflation. Policymakers’ optimistic view on inflation runs counter to a growing opinion in financial markets that slowing growth in core personal consumption expenditures (PCE) could warrant lower rates. Markets think the grace period for a “transitory” excuse has passed, but data show it’s too soon to tell. Another measure of inflation, the Fed Bank of Dallas’s “trimmed mean” PCE measure, points to higher pricing pressures ahead. As shown in the LPL Chart of the Day, the trimmed mean PCE, which has proven to be a less volatile version of core PCE, has hit 2% year-over-year growth for the past several months.
“It’s tough to make a case for lower rates with over 3% gross domestic product growth, healthy wage growth, and a labor market close to full employment,” said LPL Research Chief Investment Strategist John Lynch. “If consumer inflation picks up, the U.S. economy will be near full employment with healthy inflation across the board, fulfilling the Fed’s dual mandate.” Of course, much has happened on the global front since the Fed’s last meeting. Trade tensions have flared up again, with the United States raising tariff rates on $200 billion of Chinese imports and threatening to increase rates on the remaining swath of goods. Logically, tariffs should be a catalyst for higher consumer inflation, as higher costs should boost price growth. However, the opposite has happened over the past few months, and there are several factors to consider when thinking about future inflation. Overall, we don’t see a strong argument for a rate cut right now, and we side with the Fed in thinking consumer inflation could pick up as wage growth accelerates and growth stabilizes. At the very least, it’s becoming more obvious the Fed doesn’t have enough clarity to move policy in either direction.
Another Reason For Bulls To Smile
The S&P 500 Index has officially gained each of the first four months of the year for the first time since 2013. This comes on the heels of the best first quarter since 1998. Six straight months in green has been the best monthly win streak to start a year, and that last happened in 1996. Starting a year with strength like this historically has been a good sign, even though stocks in May saw a nearly 5% correction. “Although we wouldn’t be surprised to see continued volatility over the coming months, the good news is a great start to a year has had a funny way of eventually resolving higher,” explained LPL Senior Market Strategist Ryan Detrick. “In fact, the rest of the year has been higher an incredible 14 out of 15 times after the first four months were in the green!” As our LPL Chart of the Day shows, the S&P 500 returns the rest of the year (final 8 months) have been more than twice as strong as the average year returns—10% versus 4.7%—following four straight monthly gains to kick off a new year. There’s always a catch though, and in this case we’ve seen an average pullback of more than 8% the rest of the year.
We consider earnings season a success based on the amount of upside to prior estimates generated by S&P 500 Index companies despite several headwinds. Companies handily beat expectations to get first quarter earnings up to flat, as shown in the LPL Chart of the Day.
When earnings season began in mid-April, consensus estimates called for a 4–5% drop in S&P 500 earnings, according to FactSet data. Beating results by this much is impressive considering persistent trade uncertainty and the drag on overseas profits from a strong U.S. dollar. Also consider that the median stock in the S&P 500 has grown earnings several percentage points faster because a few large companies are dragging down the market-cap-weighted calculation. Resilient estimates are also encouraging. Since April 15, the 2019 consensus estimate for S&P 500 earnings per share has risen slightly to $168 (a 4% year-over-year increase). We consider that a win given that estimates typically fall during earnings season. “Escalating trade uncertainty and the threat of more tariffs are huge wild cards for corporate profits,” said LPL Chief Investment Strategist John Lynch. “We are hopeful that significant progress can be made on the trade front next month, when President Trump and China’s President Xi are expected to meet at the G20 summit. A prolonged impasse that lasts through the summer would make mid-single-digit earnings growth difficult to achieve in 2019.” Our base case remains that we will get a trade deal with China early this summer and consensus expectations for 3–4% earnings growth may prove to be conservative. Earnings are hardly booming, but with a continued economic expansion, low inflation, and low interest rates, we see enough earnings growth ahead to push stocks up to our year-end S&P 500 fair value target of 3,000—though it probably won’t get there in a straight line.
Pre-election Year June: Tech and Small-caps Best
June has shone brighter on NASDAQ stocks over the last 48 years as a rule ranking eighth with a 0.6% average gain, up 26 of 48 years. This contributes to NASDAQ’s “Best Eight Months” which ends in June. June ranks near the bottom on the Dow Jones Industrials just above September since 1950 with an average loss of 0.3%. S&P 500 performs similarly poorly, ranking tenth, but essentially flat (–0.02% average). Small caps also tend to fare well in June. Russell 2000 has averaged 0.6% in the month since 1979. In pre-election years since 1950, June ranks no better than mid-pack. June is the #8 DJIA month in pre-election years averaging a 0.8% gain with a record of nine advances in seventeen years. For S&P 500, June is #5 with an average gain of 1.2% (10-7 record). Pre-election year June ranks #6 for NASDAQ and #7 for Russell 2000 with average gains of 1.9% and 1.1% respectively. Recent pre-election year Junes in 2015, 2011 and 2007 were troublesome for the market as DJIA, S&P 500 and NASDAQ all declined (Russell 2000 eked out a modest gain in 2015).
([CLICK HERE FOR FRIDAY'S AFTER-MARKET EARNINGS TIME & ESTIMATES!]())
NIO Inc. $3.86
NIO Inc. (NIO) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:30 AM ET on Tuesday, May 28, 2019. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 47% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for revenue of $202.00 million to $220.00 million. Short interest has increased by 127.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 53.3% from its open following the earnings release. On Friday, May 17, 2019 there was some notable buying of 20,289 contracts of the $4.00 call expiring on Friday, May 31, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 16.5% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 12.7% move in recent quarters.
Momo Inc. (MOMO) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:30 AM ET on Tuesday, May 28, 2019. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.54 per share on revenue of $533.07 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.57 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 56% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for revenue of $529.00 million to $544.00 million. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 21.74% with revenue increasing by 22.51%. Short interest has decreased by 3.1% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 27.9% from its open following the earnings release to be 25.6% below its 200 day moving average of $34.98. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Friday, May 10, 2019 there was some notable buying of 2,208 contracts of the $30.00 call expiring on Friday, May 31, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 13.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 13.0% move in recent quarters.
Canada Goose Holdings Inc. (GOOS) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 6:45 AM ET on Wednesday, May 29, 2019. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.02 per share on revenue of $118.39 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.06 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 73% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 71.43% with revenue increasing by 19.86%. Short interest has increased by 24.8% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 19.9% from its open following the earnings release to be 18.7% below its 200 day moving average of $58.93. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 11.1% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 15.0% move in recent quarters.
Costco Wholesale Corp. (COST) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:15 PM ET on Thursday, May 30, 2019. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.83 per share on revenue of $34.80 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.84 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 76% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 7.65% with revenue increasing by 7.54%. Short interest has decreased by 2.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 9.7% from its open following the earnings release to be 9.2% above its 200 day moving average of $226.54. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Tuesday, May 14, 2019 there was some notable buying of 3,428 contracts of the $250.00 call expiring on Friday, May 31, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 3.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 4.0% move in recent quarters.
Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (PANW) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:15 PM ET on Wednesday, May 29, 2019. The consensus earnings estimate is $1.25 per share on revenue of $703.44 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $1.29 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 81% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for earnings of $1.23 to $1.25 per share on revenue of $697.00 million to $707.00 million. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 20.19% with revenue increasing by 24.04%. Short interest has decreased by 8.1% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 16.2% from its open following the earnings release to be 1.2% above its 200 day moving average of $213.65. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. On Thursday, May 16, 2019 there was some notable buying of 1,160 contracts of the $237.50 call expiring on Friday, June 7, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 8.4% move on earnings.
Zscaler, Inc. (ZS) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:05 PM ET on Thursday, May 30, 2019. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.01 per share on revenue of $74.54 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.03 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 77% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for earnings of approximately $0.01 per share on revenue of $74.00 million to $75.00 million. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 116.67% with revenue increasing by 51.62%. Short interest has decreased by 8.0% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 28.3% from its open following the earnings release to be 50.6% above its 200 day moving average of $48.98. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Monday, May 20, 2019 there was some notable buying of 1,380 contracts of the $72.50 put expiring on Friday, June 7, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 13.6% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 16.4% move in recent quarters.
Okta, Inc. (OKTA) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:05 PM ET on Thursday, May 30, 2019. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.21 per share on revenue of $116.66 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.17) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 82% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for a loss of $0.22 to $0.21 per share on revenue of $116.00 million to $117.00 million. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 133.33% with revenue increasing by 39.51%. Short interest has increased by 33.4% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 46.6% from its open following the earnings release to be 48.1% above its 200 day moving average of $74.02. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Tuesday, May 21, 2019 there was some notable buying of 1,003 contracts of the $90.00 put expiring on Friday, June 7, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 10.9% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 8.4% move in recent quarters.
Workday, Inc. (WDAY) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Tuesday, May 28, 2019. The consensus earnings estimate is $0.41 per share on revenue of $814.68 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $0.44 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 71% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for revenue of $812.00 million to $814.00 million. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 7.89% with revenue increasing by 31.69%. Short interest has decreased by 12.5% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 5.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 27.6% above its 200 day moving average of $165.20. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Thursday, May 23, 2019 there was some notable buying of 1,587 contracts of the $235.00 call expiring on Friday, June 21, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 7.8% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 25.2% move in recent quarters.
Nutanix, Inc. (NTNX) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Thursday, May 30, 2019. The consensus estimate is for a loss of $0.60 per share on revenue of $296.48 million and the Earnings Whisper ® number is ($0.58) per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 40% expecting an earnings beat The company's guidance was for a loss of approximately $0.60 per share on revenue of $290.00 million to $300.00 million. Consensus estimates are for earnings to decline year-over-year by 185.71% with revenue increasing by 2.44%. Short interest has increased by 59.1% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted lower by 4.4% from its open following the earnings release to be 20.5% below its 200 day moving average of $44.18. Overall earnings estimates have been revised lower since the company's last earnings release. On Wednesday, May 15, 2019 there was some notable buying of 5,000 contracts of the $40.00 put expiring on Friday, June 7, 2019. Option traders are pricing in a 15.3% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 11.3% move in recent quarters.
ULTA Beauty (ULTA) is confirmed to report earnings at approximately 4:00 PM ET on Thursday, May 30, 2019. The consensus earnings estimate is $3.06 per share on revenue of $1.74 billion and the Earnings Whisper ® number is $3.10 per share. Investor sentiment going into the company's earnings release has 87% expecting an earnings beat. Consensus estimates are for year-over-year earnings growth of 16.35% with revenue increasing by 12.72%. Short interest has increased by 16.3% since the company's last earnings release while the stock has drifted higher by 2.2% from its open following the earnings release to be 14.1% above its 200 day moving average of $293.81. Overall earnings estimates have been revised higher since the company's last earnings release. Option traders are pricing in a 7.7% move on earnings and the stock has averaged a 6.7% move in recent quarters.
Forex Humor – BROKERS . Funny Forex Picture #1: Market makers on the hunt Funny Forex Picture #2: Don’t let this be you Funny Forex Picture #3: Stocks – Shorts Funny Forex Picture #4: Traders and Broker Funny Forex Picture #5: Forex Food Funny Forex Picture #6: Chose your Leverage See more Funny Forex pictures and Videos in our FOREX HUMOR section The funny looking rectangle above is essentially a Glide Path on what can be thought of as Final Approach to a specific target. It is by no means a 100% slam dunk guarantee, but it does represent a fairly plausible explanation for where price has a good chance of going in the near term. ... Forex Factory® is a brand of Fair Economy, Inc. Terms ... / Funny / Forex Jokes. Forex Jokes. October 3, 2019 by Fxigor. Share Tweet. In this post I put several short jokes that I like related to forex jokes, trading jokes and broker jokes, stock trading jokes. I hope you will like it. How do you find a good small-cap fund manager? Find a good large-cap fund manager, and wait. Funny Forex Picture #1 90% traders. Funny Forex Picture #2 Bull and bear. Funny Forex Picture #3 Price Action. Funny Forex Picture #4 Advertising true. Funny Forex Picture #5 Candlestick. Funny Forex Picture #6 Evolution. Funny Forex Picture #7 Sell-Buy. Funny Forex Picture #8 Forex Career. Funny Forex Picture #9 Currency pairs. Funny Forex Picture #10 Unpredictable market Forex Shirts Shop for Forex shirts, hoodies and gifts. Find Forex designs printed with care on top quality garments.
Cryptocurrency : Level of Manipulation : Funny - YouTube
Funny Forex ( http://www.profitF.com/ ) Funny forex Mbheki Nkomonde. Loading... Unsubscribe from Mbheki Nkomonde? ... Forex Traders Lifestyle - Trading Excess in the City (Documentary) - Duration: 57:48. All about Trading in Forex and Binary Option Marked. FOREX FUNNY MOMENTS ---------------- Music: DJ Bass LM --------------- Subscribe! https://YouTube.co... Day Trader Documentary - A day in the life of a multimillionaire forex trader - Duration: 18:47. ... Simply Perfect Marketing Funny Video - Duration: 1:07. Monica Beeman Recommended for you. Level of Manipulation about Cryptocurrency . . update: Credit to Bizonacci