HMB
-
Posts
476 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Community Tutorials
Store
Posts posted by HMB
-
-
if this was the "sell-off" because Nancy "dug in", then I don't think the market was really expecting a pre-election deal
-
6 minutes ago, dmedin said:
The more I keep thinking about trading, the less I know.
It's a downhill process every single day. I am totally clueless now, but I was full of ideas this morning.
Who knows?
"Markets are there to keep us humble." K. Foulathi
think what you describe is exactly what he meant...
personally, I'm at the stage of drawing funny oval shapes on my charts - maybe this way I'll notice something, some day...:
.thumb.png.9432f94d03ed1e838eb080ed886201c8.png)
-
1
-
-
using the "Grimes-pivots" the same way as before (see above posts Monday - Wednesday) would now give a buy signal (time zone UK):
-
20 hours ago, jlz said:
Good paper, the other day I came across this link that is worth sharing as well.
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/html/digitaleuro.en.html
The digital currency should be real in about two years counting from 2021. Bahamas has just released their digital currency to their citizens and they can now operate with it. China is also testing their digital yuan in Shenzhen so I see it being live in a few months as well.
One point that I think is blocked is that I don't see a public bank being created anytime soon. Many European countries have been asking for a public finance sector that could remedy those sanctions coming from economic powers and nothing has been done. I don't hold hope for a public bank in Europe, maybe the digital currency will remedy some of the aspects but that will be it.
thanks - the regulated digital currency theme is interesting, I think as usual I'm late in trying to understand it... but it seems to have a long-term potential of further changing our financial system fundamentally (that would deserve a separate thread, maybe..?) - no more bank run worries, no more quarter end repo rate spikes, negative deposit rates could be ruled out... haven't thought this through at all. will try to find some accessible analysis on use and risks...
-
4 hours ago, dmedin said:
would you only look for shorts?
at this stage, no I would not (more below). for reasons given above (and others) I do however think this is simply the market segment where the action is for now, in both directions, and hence my current focus
4 hours ago, dmedin said:Those long legs tell me that there's a lot of buying pressure and the selling momentum is drying up.
yes, reading it the same.
there are a few major issues pending: antitrust suit, election... which may be holding NDX down for now. Valuations are ginormous, correction risk is massive at any point IMHO. https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NDAQ/nasdaq/price-sales
Nevertheless, I still think expectations of further changing consumer behavior and growth acceleration in some segments due to technology convergence constitute a strong fundamental trend that may cause any significant pullback to be bought quickly as discussed earlier:
...also, as long as US large cap tech/tech-enabled consumer/communication products/services companies keep investing in respective inventions (and buying up inventors early...), long NDX "hedges" you against missing out on profiting from innovation (if you share that "concern")...
counter-arguments could be that technology progress and other major trends lead also to significant growth potential in other areas, where valuations are not that high... e.g. Jeremy Rifkin points to the potentially changing business model of utilities (think he mentioned explicitly Germany) in his vision of the "sharing economy" - think I posted this 2018 link earlier...:
...sorry, probably a bit digressing here... in summary, I'd say the banks and others will need volatility in the current flat curve environment... at times it may seem relatively attractive for them to silently collude and cause a bit of a NDX panic for a while (till M&A/IPO profits seem in danger...), but I don't argue for reverting of valuations to any kind of a historical or broader cross-sectional mean anymore... however I'm probably also biased after having lost big and consistently with US large cap shorts since 2016... as @Kodiak pointed out in the thread linked to vabove - election shouldn't be forgotten...
..what I'm also still trying to make up my mind with if the role of money in this world has permanently changed in a way that also makes traditional valuation ratios to be looked at differently... any veiws on that?
sorry digressing again from your question... best summary I can come up with...: I HAVE NO IDEA, ...still would rather look for shorts elsewhere - of course I've been repeatedly an incredibly reliable counter-indicator, though..
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, dmedin said:
Our Dax short 'hit the spot' and netted us £135 in profit
couldn't have timed it better! care to share what made you close it?
-
Watching the 2nd debate - I don't get the polls anymore. And I don't get the democrats' strategy. Out of the zillion potential, powerful attack points, they choose to focus fully on the 200K US virus deaths - as if Biden could have prevented any of those. I doubt that any serious, impartial virologist would support this campaign strategy, but I may be wrong (again).
The polls don't make sense to me at all anymore: people are craving for return to normal, Trump's message is let's return to normal, Biden's is plastic cubes in restaurants and masks in schools, and he leads the polls by almost 10 points? I'm lacking the mental capacity to reconcile this.
Hence I try to keep being prepared for the polls being even more off than last time.
-
should look similar with GICS - i.e. NDX underweight (vs SPX)
to Financials (incl. RE), Energy, Materials and Utilities together roughly 25%... and those went kinda nowhere over the more or less recent past...:
...of course this is rather superficial, but (together with comparisons posted earlier) suggests really exactly two - closely linked - segments in global asset markets have been trending (up) recent years: US large cap tech and consumer (incl. Healthcare) stocks. ...apparently a significant share of all the money printed globally this period seems to eventually somehow have found its way into these highly concentrated segments...
-
...lowered expectations paying off...:
-
piece published by ECFR on Tusday: https://www.ecfr.eu/publications/summary/defending_europe_economic_sovereignty_new_ways_to_resist_economic_coercion
their suggested toolbox:
-
6 hours ago, dmedin said:
Our second short on the Dax is working out 😘
RSI is not 'oversold yet', let it keep running!
well done - still short?
now in important zone..? strong moves in either direction likely..? back to pure Corona play..?
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, dmedin said:
Wall Street did indeed break our level. We were just too hasty to put a trade on (by going long not only once but twice). If you zoom out on the hourly chart you see it is in a downtrend, no need for a MA. We went long because we thought we saw a support area being respected, but forgot that you need confirmation of a new high (and especially so when price has been moving down sharply). Also the daily candles were not strong.
looks quite directionless to me, and now roughly back at a level around which we've been oscillating for two months:
I'd say high rebound probability, the slightly lower low at this stage is not significant enough IMHO
-
1
-
-
On 19/10/2020 at 03:57, HMB said:
trying out third oder pivots as defined by Adam H. Grimes (https://adamhgrimes.com/library/market-structure/)..: a short entered after it became clear (with the open of the candle starting 4 pm Wednesday) that the Tuesday NQ high was a third order pivot on the one hour chart would be in profit - however, no exit signal, yet, correct me if I'm wrong...:
black arrows: 1st order "Grimes pivots", blue: 2nd order, yellow: 3rd order (first order pivots only marked if relevant to establish 2nd order pivots)
(maybe this can be fine-tuned by distinguishing by the the extent of pullbacks, or direction vs direction of a higher level trend..)
with the previous hour's candle completed, Monday's low became a third-order Grimes pivot point - taking this as a signal would have resulted in closing the short 400 points below entry:
I find this interesting. of course this a sample of one so absolutely not representative. and there are probably easier ways to come to the same conclusion - e.g. selling after a pronounced up-move once two lower highs emerge, or breakthrough the approximate neckline of a h&s pattern, and buying once a low held a very close test and a re-test would have lead to the same here... also kinda would require 24/5 monitoring...
will try to work on a plan addressing these issues
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, dmedin said:
Take your tongue out of other people's bottoms, little Swedish hacker retard.
this probably should have been ignored, but IMHO it was a new low. obviously jlz tried to help someone here, and referred to others to add emphasis to a point. I'm writing this because I actually asked for support in my earlier response, and I'm very pleased I'm not the only one who reacted to this post thoughtfully, so I think it would be pretty weak if I didn't speak up here.
That may make me look ridiculous, and like my tongue is now travelling through a bunch of cracks, but I don't give a **** (like I think you would not either).
I'm actually surprised that you @dmedin left it to this statement - usually you're significantly more effective in warning people of the hazards we face as retail punters IMHO - I think you definitely had stronger moments.
you know what I would find useful: having a separate, focused thread for insults - I'm sure by now the respective targets wouldn't mind (to not again say not give a ****), and other discussions could become - let's say "leaner".
I genuinely think I got a lot of valuable insights from many of your posts here, and I highly appreciate the honest feedback, and I also believe you have good intentions. I don't know about any history between you, jlz, THT, and Caseynotes. I further think you play an important role here in this forum and I look forward to more productive discussions with you.
But the post quoted above was a new low.
-
Just now, u0362565 said:
Yes i see the problem for sure, but one thing is true, it does allow you potentially many goes potentially far more than is statistically likely for you to lose. So would negate the requirement for a high win rate, however i see that if you do exhaust your number of attempts it becomes like having a very large risk for not much reward, but it is about the probability in the end.. Its if you can stomach it. Personally i struggled and if you think it could affect your health is it worth it, no. Surely most traders are stressed most of the time!?
I will not engage in this discussion further. This is too much responsibility for me, sorry. You should discuss this with someone who truly knows you - I suggest your parents or similar. Not joking, no matter your age.
Also speak with experienced traders and try to listen. But you likely won't. And in ten years you will likely write a similar response as I'm doing now.
DON'T INCREASE SIZE TO MAKE UP FOR LOSSES - THIS IS THE MOST DANGEROUS MISTAKE YOU CAN MAKE!
It's about letting profitable trades run, and cutting losses early, so that you are with a low win rate still profitable
I hope for others in this forum to support me here. But I'm out.
THIS IS NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE.
-
1
-
-
This is the only thing I know without doubt about trading: trying to make up for losses with larger trades is the way to ruin with certainty.
Read you own post again and ask what it would imply: if you can't make money with a small risk, you take a larger risk.
And what if that goes wrong? Of course - double up. And then it fails again..? Then you're walking to the bank to ask for a consumer loan...
Please read that "cold" warning about 76% of traders "encountering losses" again - and try to add some imagination to it. Try to imagine ruin with all its consequences. And then ask yourself how people got to that point.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, u0362565 said:
Hi all,
I was wondering how others view the bet size? in trades. I'm talking about the £/point figure. Assuming most go for high reward/risk ratio that means you don't need such a high win rate however e.g. a win rate of 33% may seem high to some for a 2:1 ratio. So assuming you can't achieve 33% you can't keep plugging away with the same bet size expecting to achieve profit. So do you make your calculations for the next trade considering that you need to make up for prior losses? E.g. if you've lost more than 3/10 trades. I find it hard to believe that people can achieve a consistent win rate that doesn't involve increasing the bet size to compensate for losses. Or do you always use one figure e.g. £5/point. Perhaps this is the rub, you can keep the bet size the same if you truly can achieve said win rate consistently. For those who can't, give up? Alternatively don't adjust bet size but adjust the position size, that's another option but keeping the ratio the same.
I did. It led to catastrophe. Read my 2nd post on this site. If I could start again, I'd NEVER increase size as a reaction to a loss.
-
3
-
-
39 minutes ago, dmedin said:
I'm really curious to know what's stopping him from putting trades on like I'm doing. BTW, I'm now using Demo to put my trades on and will be for the foreseeable future. I don't have any hang-ups about being wrong or looking ridiculous.
As you know I posted some trades in recent months as well (both real and demo), and I appreciate your doing so.
However, I also understand everyone who doesn't, and am undecided about how to handle this in the future myself - mainly because I think once you make your trades public, you encounter additional issues that can distract you from the target: making money for your own account.
Some of these issues are: you might suddenly feel responsible for people who may have acted on your post. Then you might realize you haven't posted the full story, because you had (maybe subconsciously) a back-up plan for when the trade doesn't work, which you didn't share. Also, the market environment may just change to a (not with any likelihood anticipated) point that it makes sense to close the trade early, or keeping it open but adding an additional position in your portfolio which hedges that trade partially. The initial stop may suddenly seem too close to an important level that got established in the meantime and you move it just a bit. etc.
In summary, unless your approach implies doing absolutely nothing with the trade until it reaches its a priori defined fixed exit level (or stop) and considering it always in isolation, you'd end up posting frequent updates of your full (dynamically changing) portfolio strategy and follow-up posting on existing trades.
in the extreme you become like those guys...:
-
1
-
-
...thanks to SPACs, record IPOS...:
source: https://blog.evergreengavekal.com/swimming-with-the-target-date-whale/
-
"Funds have pulled back from one of the biggest short positions in U.S. tech stocks in over a decade, in a near-record buying spree of Nasdaq futures, CFTC data from last week showed."
...
"The QQQ has reached $144.65 billion in assets under management, a record high, according to data from Lipper."
...
"The ratio of call options relative to put options, a measure of how bullish traders are, has climbed since late September and is close to the peak reached just before the sell-off that month."
...
"Interest in call options for companies such as Apple Inc AAPL.O, Facebook Inc FB.O and Netflix Inc NFLX.O - members of the market-leading group collectively known as FAANG - has especially climbed in recent weeks. Skew, a measure of demand for puts versus calls, is near its lowest levels over the past year for those companies, according to Trade Alert"
-
-
...some numbers on obvious developments... (BBG):
"Average U.S. household spending this holiday season is expected to decrease 7% from 2019, with a sharp 34% drop in travel spending accounting for most of the decrease, according to Rod Sides, a Deloitte vice chairman. Some of the money normally spent away from home will go toward non-gift purchases, like home furnishings and seasonal decor."
-
1 hour ago, dmedin said:
buy and hold
hold till... you need the money?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Caseynotes said:
not sure what that link is above, here is the CWT website all episodes , Nic Duke is number 063.
yes, sorry, should have tried it first - thanks
.png.76ce8e39fe456781b02e9a414efd687f.png)
NDX
in Indices and Macro Events
Posted · Edited by HMB
...looks almost like they found a way to cheat the algos...: buy the dip, see if there's a rebound, and if yes, come out with a no-deal-yet comment, to buy more after the subsequent dip...: