Announcement

**jstahl** · 10-05-2007, 05:39 PM

Hi Glen,

The first question can be left to interpretation. For myself, I will take the trade even if the stop was hit before the trigger is hit. An example of this would be the blue breakout bar in PCLN on August 8. The stop area was hit before you were triggered in. The bars never change color and the trigger is hit on August 23rd. After some retracement, you are now off to the races and have a nice profit in the trade.

I have seen the XTL Bar change color intra-bar, so best to wait for the bar to close to establish your trigger and stop points.

I have never changed any default settings on the XTL. It is a great indicator as is, in my opinion.

JTI was replace by XTL. There is no need to combine the two.
I do not think you would find a more accurate system by combining the two.

True, the XTL is designed to get you into the early stage of Wave 3. However, wave counts are dynamic. Wave three is the largest trend of the 5 wave impulse. Since the wave counts are dynamic, you will not necessarily see a wave one and a wave 2 when the blue bar breakout occurs. An example is AAPL XTL blue bar on July 20, 2006. If you go into replay mode you will see that the wave count at the time was an Elliott Wave 4 down. As time went on, the wave count adjusted. Therefore, I would not suggest trying to combine the two. I would use the XTL breakout as independent of the wave count.

In my opinion, the best XTL trades come when you see a breakout bar that shows what I call a "dramatic shift in sentiment". With stocks, I can cite two examples. AAPL on July 20, 2006. ISRG on 2-2-07 (with this one you had to be patient and wait for the trigger).

With Forex it is more difficult to gage a dramatic shift in sentiment as these markets trade 24 hours. However, if you have a downtrend in a currency (all red bars) and one day it shifts to blue because of some government intervention (lowering or raising of rates) this would also be the shift that I am looking for.

Let me know what other questions you have.

Joel

**demarcog** · 10-17-2007, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by jstahl
Hi Glen,

The first question can be left to interpretation. For myself, I will take the trade even if the stop was hit before the trigger is hit. An example of this would be the blue breakout bar in PCLN on August 8. The stop area was hit before you were triggered in. The bars never change color and the trigger is hit on August 23rd. After some retracement, you are now off to the races and have a nice profit in the trade.

I have seen the XTL Bar change color intra-bar, so best to wait for the bar to close to establish your trigger and stop points.

I have never changed any default settings on the XTL. It is a great indicator as is, in my opinion.

JTI was replace by XTL. There is no need to combine the two.
I do not think you would find a more accurate system by combining the two.

True, the XTL is designed to get you into the early stage of Wave 3. However, wave counts are dynamic. Wave three is the largest trend of the 5 wave impulse. Since the wave counts are dynamic, you will not necessarily see a wave one and a wave 2 when the blue bar breakout occurs. An example is AAPL XTL blue bar on July 20, 2006. If you go into replay mode you will see that the wave count at the time was an Elliott Wave 4 down. As time went on, the wave count adjusted. Therefore, I would not suggest trying to combine the two. I would use the XTL breakout as independent of the wave count.

In my opinion, the best XTL trades come when you see a breakout bar that shows what I call a "dramatic shift in sentiment". With stocks, I can cite two examples. AAPL on July 20, 2006. ISRG on 2-2-07 (with this one you had to be patient and wait for the trigger).

With Forex it is more difficult to gage a dramatic shift in sentiment as these markets trade 24 hours. However, if you have a downtrend in a currency (all red bars) and one day it shifts to blue because of some government intervention (lowering or raising of rates) this would also be the shift that I am looking for.

Let me know what other questions you have.

Joel

Joel,

Thanks for the response I really appreciate the information.

I hear what you are saying about the "dynamic" wave counts. I went through dozens of example type 2 trades in the fileshare and elsewhere (videos etc). and it definately looks like a winning strategy.

I coded up a type 2 strategy that was 80 to 100 percent profitable backtesting, but doesn't seem to as well in tick replay. In tick replay of 5 minute data in GBP the wave counts are changing quite frequently. So I'm at a loss right now what to do about it.

I have an XTL strategy that actually does about as good as any strategy I've yet come with, alot better then the Type2 in tick replay anyway. I thought perhaps if I could filter out a small percentage of the loosing trades by only taking the trade if there is an associated impulse wave that then I'd have something "hedge fund" ready, but you make a good point. It's not a big deal to code in the logic for a XTL & impulse wave, if I do I'll let you know how it goes.

Sounds like you use the XTL strategy using daily charts for stocks? XTL does well on daily charts but not sure if I saw 2-3 percent a month, which is my goal for an automated strategy. time will tell whether it's possible or not.

Anyway, thanks very much for the information, if you like to continue the dialog offline and not bore everyone with our esoteric detail please feel free anytime to email me at: [email protected].

Glen

**Ainsley** · 10-21-2007, 07:19 PM

Try building a displaced moving average

Hi guys,

horses for courses and so different tools for different stocks and markets.

The combination that seems good for me is the Elliott studies with three displaced moving averages overlayed on the chart, this helps set entry, exit and stop's which is visual and easy to use, remember to tick the exponential button when creating and tuning your displaced moving averages.

I got this from a friend a few years back, its called alligator / fractal theory from a chap called bill williams, do a search on him, his work is elegant and works very well with advanced get, in fact it compliments it quite well.

I have created a normal and fast fractal (DMA) for use in either a fast moving market where you want to run tight entry and stops as well as normal markets.

enjoy

Attached Files

**demarcog** · 10-21-2007, 08:02 PM

Re: Try building a displaced moving average

Originally posted by Ainsley
Hi guys,

horses for courses and so different tools for different stocks and markets.

The combination that seems good for me is the Elliott studies with three displaced moving averages overlayed on the chart, this helps set entry, exit and stop's which is visual and easy to use, remember to tick the exponential button when creating and tuning your displaced moving averages.

I got this from a friend a few years back, its called alligator / fractal theory from a chap called bill williams, do a search on him, his work is elegant and works very well with advanced get, in fact it compliments it quite well.

I have created a normal and fast fractal (DMA) for use in either a fast moving market where you want to run tight entry and stops as well as normal markets.

enjoy

Ainsley,

Thanks very much for the information. Did a search and there is alot of material out there but it does look very promising. Always looking for new trading ideas.

It's not clear what specific parameters are you using are they the "standard setting" or some specific variation. Also what are your rules for stops, entry and exits? I'

It would be nice to back test these ideas have you coded up any of these studies in strategy format. If you provide the specific rules maybe I can give it a shot. Although right now I'm concentrating on getting the AGET strategies down.

One good turn deserves another however: so FWIW check out these trades on GBP for the last week and a half. somewhere around 100 pips a trade....unreal. Greenish background is long and redish is short... (

Of course now that my research is done and I turned the system on tonight...the first trade taken at 18:05 short at 2.0515 althought up 40 pips is guaranteed not to work out...murphy's law..

Anyway thanks for the information.

Glen

Attached Files

**Ainsley** · 10-22-2007, 08:15 PM

Displaced Moving Averages

Hi Glen,

Create three moving averages with the below figures

blue = 13,8
red = 8,5
Green = 5,3

save it as a Fractal or some such name

Try it on a daily and a sixty minute chart, tune it up a bit so that it fits in with the Elliot counts, tune it further to set good entry & exit points i.e. tighten it up or loosen it.

Once happy use it to set early entry and exit points by interpreting the crossover of the lines for example, green crosses red with the full support of the Elliott studies is a good entry indicator and vice versa for exit

remember to keep it simple and don't drift into the analyses paralyses mode of back testing as the laws of probability mean that a 100% success ratio is not realistic rather a higher percentage is, oops I'm drifting into lecture mode, sorry about that, have fun, let me know how you go.

Regards

Ainsley

**demarcog** · 10-22-2007, 09:11 PM

Re: Displaced Moving Averages

Originally posted by Ainsley
Hi Glen,

Create three moving averages with the below figures

blue = 13,8
red = 8,5
Green = 5,3

save it as a Fractal or some such name

Try it on a daily and a sixty minute chart, tune it up a bit so that it fits in with the Elliot counts, tune it further to set good entry & exit points i.e. tighten it up or loosen it.

Once happy use it to set early entry and exit points by interpreting the crossover of the lines for example, green crosses red with the full support of the Elliott studies is a good entry indicator and vice versa for exit

remember to keep it simple and don't drift into the analyses paralyses mode of back testing as the laws of probability mean that a 100% success ratio is not realistic rather a higher percentage is, oops I'm drifting into lecture mode, sorry about that, have fun, let me know how you go.

Regards

Ainsley

Ainsley,

Just what I was looking for, and thank you very much for taking the time to post that, it's greatly appreciated.

BTW, feel free to lecture away...however insecure and easily offended I may or may not be....feelings are repaired much more quickly then one's capital.....seriously, feel free to blast away, always interested in listening and certain you have something worthwhile to offer.

I'm not beyond experiencing an occasional bout of momentary delusions when it comes to trading, and I didn't mean to suggest that Type2 strategies are anywhere near 100 percent effective. I appreciate you pointing that out as others may have gotten the same idea. In fact it closer to 33% from what's been mentioned in the classes.

I just thought it was an interesting chart.

thanks again,

Glen

**Ainsley** · 10-23-2007, 05:13 PM

Backtesting

Hi Glen,

I have backtested all the tools that come with Advanced GET using one stock which I wound back a year, the results are very interesting, individually the tools return between 30 - 48% success but when doing combinations then the success rate jumpts to 52 - 78%.

my last average was 73% on three week trade durations and then I of course tried daily trades which dropped my average down to 58% so I stopped that and have returned to my comfort zone.

Also its interesting to note that the same combination does not work with all stocks rather one has to dig in the tool bag and find what works for that stock and market and tune up for it.

Quite a bit of fun really or am I just stuck in my ways

If it was easy everyone would be doing it and then the risk would be zero and so would the reward so enjoy the challange i say.

Regards

Ainsley

**demarcog** · 10-23-2007, 06:23 PM

Re: Backtesting

Originally posted by Ainsley
Hi Glen,

I have backtested all the tools that come with Advanced GET using one stock which I wound back a year, the results are very interesting, individually the tools return between 30 - 48% success but when doing combinations then the success rate jumpts to 52 - 78%.

Ainsley,

Wow that is some of the most impressive and important information I've seen in ths forum ( would I love to pick your brain for a few days).

How did you test those strategies manually or via a strategy EFS?

By combinations I assume you mean multiple AGET indicator confirmation, ie, Type 2 long, with a positive XTL, or stochastic trigger, or are you referring to mob, elipsis, combinations, or non-AGET indicator combinations?

I will try and refrain myself and not take advantage of your kindness by asking all the questions raised in my mind.

The reason I ask is I've got the xtl coded and actually autotraded it for a week or so as it backtested well. But ran into a bit of a drawdown and wanted to focus on a Type2 which I love in principle..

Did alot of work on coding and testing a Type2 and it's been difficult so far, maybe impossible given the dynamic wave counts.

I have the highest confidence ilevel in the AGET techniques, the people recomending it, and the excellent staff and best possible training imaginable.

But I've literally spent years testing thousands of possible systems certain many would pop to the top as profitable. None did, zero.

So it's important for me to validate a system before I feel comfortable trading it. I'm a firm believer in AGET, not doubt it's the best out there and also want to auto trade it hence, the EFS effort.

I hand traded about about 8 setups on the EUR and GBP last night and they all turned into wave 3's, not in my favor, so I'm a little shell shocked right now.

my last average was 73% on three week trade durations and then I of course tried daily trades which dropped my average down to 58% so I stopped that and have returned to my comfort zone.

Haven't quite gotten to 73% profitable yet. What type of average win to average loss ratio do you consider successful at 73% profitibility, or even 50% profitability.

Regarding the length of trade. I've found that a shorter time frame when I tested (some times very short 5-15 or short tick intervals 233t would usually yield a better ROI when testing, but with 10 days available can't be too sure of the longer term quity curve.

For me a 3 week duration means a medium-term intervals of 60-240 min. Which may be preferable for the Type1 & 2 as the wave counts I imagine would be more stable.

Also its interesting to note that the same combination does not work with all stocks rather one has to dig in the tool bag and find what works for that stock and market and tune up for it.

That is interesting and I have noticed that. I have several systems that make decent profits on stocks like OIH, a 3 percent day volatility beast. But not so well on the Stock indices or currencies.

Quite a bit of fun really or am I just stuck in my ways

If it was easy everyone would be doing it and then the risk would be zero and so would the reward so enjoy the challange i say.

Regards

Ainsley

I knew going in it wasn't easy, but finding a tradeable system to autotrade is infinitely more difficult then I ever imagined. Enjoying the challenge is something I tend to forget about, thanks for that important heads up.

I suppose is was good that I underestimated the challenge, as now it's way past the point of giving up. Either I'll figure it out or get taken out ...feet first ..

If the fun is proportional to the effort put in then I'm anticipating one heck of a good time, and soooner then later as I'm getting closer.

I really appreciate you taking the time to "pass it on", I am looking closely at you prior recomendations and appreciate anything you have to share.

Thank you very much again,

Glen

ps..If you want to continue the discussion (I don't want to burden people with a lenghtly post) feel free anytime to email me[email protected]

**Ainsley** · 10-27-2007, 03:27 PM

analysis paralysis

Hi Glen,

Ok now to answer your questions

1. Nope didn’t use the EFS, did it the old fashioned way ie manually tested and recorded using an excel spreadsheet,
2. Yup, combinations are based on the Elliott studies ie ellipse, oscillators, alligator etc
3. Type 2 is fantastic, work on entry, exit, stop loss
4. Coding and testing type 2, good idea but being a perfectionist will not wash, it’s all probability, manage the entry and exit, that is better and don’t chase the holy grail i.e. the perfect system or overtrade, sometimes the markets not working well, recognise this and leave it alone for a day or two
5. I feel that the GET gear is certainly the original and the best, some others have slight improvements but hardly worth moving for and Brent and Russ are great
6. So you’ve dedicated hours and hours on investigating the many systems, this sounds like holy grail searching, you know what to do, so do it but of course when moving from paper trades to the real thing it all goes pear shaped and doesn’t work well at all, this is normal as you have now removed your clinical view and have now introduced psychology now this is tough as how do you manage yourself, a big question that took me a few years to work out
7. Validating a system you say, now this holy grail stuff, what this really means is that you have eliminated all the risk, got it to zero, this of course can never happen, thus you search continually for the method, what i aim for is 80% success, that’s it, some trades will loose
8. I trade stocks and CFD’s, the currency and options are too hard for me, they can move around in an unpredictable manner so i keep well away, but that’s me, stuck in my ways
9. According to the training vids, one has to be 60% successful on trades to be profitable, this is my aim, actually I’m after 80%
10. As for trading system, i feel all the back testing is familiarisation with the tools and this is actually your system, knowing what tools to use, ie we have a proven race car, now we have to learn how to drive it, essentially this is what your backesting is but only manual back testing not using the programmatic tools, this is shortcutting and is a flawed concept when probability is considered.

• The problem with the EFS is that is just to flexible and powerful, this means you will never trade but rather spend you time skilling up to be a programmer so that you can write EFS code which at the end of the day is not flexible enough to trade dynamically anyways
• By the way, my last four trades went like this, three good ones and one bad one that wiped out the profits of the previous three, now the point here is the maths looks great ie 3 out of 4 but the reality is different, so keep this in mind when you review the pure mathematics of performance.

Hope I didn’t waffle on too much.

Regards

Ainsley

PS – for every loss I ever took, i took this as education paid for, what I did was identify the problem, create a business rule for it and then consider this for every trade following, this softened the pain of the loss as i paid for some knowledge.

**demarcog** · 10-27-2007, 05:34 PM

Re: analysis paralysis

Originally posted by Ainsley
Hi Glen,

Ok now to answer your questions

1. Nope didn’t use the EFS, did it the old fashioned way ie manually tested and recorded using an excel spreadsheet,
2. Yup, combinations are based on the Elliott studies ie ellipse, oscillators, alligator etc

Hi Ainsley,

Thanks for the great responses.

Where can I find doc on the alligator, & any good links you can reccommend ?

3. Type 2 is fantastic, work on entry, exit, stop loss

I'm trying to follow as closely as posssbily the AGET entry: wave 5, divergence, break of regression line signals entry. Initially stop 1 tick above wave 5 high/low. Not exactly sure at what point in the trade progression to switch to regression channel stops. Was thinking about possibly using the initial stop amount as a fixed trailing stop until either break even or until price is within the regression channel by the stop amount and switching to the channel method

4. Coding and testing type 2, good idea but being a perfectionist will not wash, it’s all probability, manage the entry and exit, that is better and don’t chase the holy grail i.e. the perfect system or overtrade, sometimes the markets not working well, recognise this and leave it alone for a day or two
5. I feel that the GET gear is certainly the original and the best, some others have slight improvements but hardly worth moving for and Brent and Russ are great

7. Validating a system you say, now this holy grail stuff, what this really means is that you have eliminated all the risk, got it to zero, this of course can never happen, thus you search continually for the method, what i aim for is 80% success, that’s it, some trades will loose
8. I trade stocks and CFD’s, the currency and options are too hard for me, they can move around in an unpredictable manner so i keep well away, but that’s me, stuck in my ways
9. According to the training vids, one has to be 60% successful on trades to be profitable, this is my aim, actually I’m after 80%

I absolutely agree, and apologize for picking a screen image that looks like the "holy grail'. If I gave the impression that was a typical time period, I must have been dreaming in public!

My "holy grail" or the success rate I'm targeting is something profitable 45-50% with 2:1 with a low (<3%) max drawdown
The equity curve for this type of performance is a nice 45 degree uptrend with lost of pullbacks but no uptrend line breaks. Love those equity curve charts for system result comparision.

As for trading system, i feel all the back testing is familiarisation with the tools and this is actually your system, knowing what tools to use, ie we have a proven race car, now we have to learn how to drive it, essentially this is what your backesting is but only manual back testing not using the programmatic tools, this is shortcutting and is a flawed concept when probability is considered.

• The problem with the EFS is that is just to flexible and powerful, this means you will never trade but rather spend you time skilling up to be a programmer so that you can write EFS code which at the end of the day is not flexible enough to trade dynamically anyways
• By the way, my last four trades went like this, three good ones and one bad one that wiped out the profits of the previous three, now the point here is the maths looks great ie 3 out of 4 but the reality is different, so keep this in mind when you review the pure mathematics of performance.

Hope I didn’t waffle on too much.

I don't see you waffling at all, it's consistent and you make one very important point. And to this I absolutely plead guilty to a "holy grail" obsession and I didn't even realize it at the time.

When I first started testing systems I expected to find quite a few that met my modest version of a "holy grail" system. Nothing came even close in fact and maybe I picked the wrong 300 or so indicator/strategy combinations, but intraday NOTHING even made a profit over time. So I didn't see it as a search for holy grail and it was not really.

But the point is as you said the time is much better well spent taking that loosing system and using money management, etc and work it into a viable trading system if at all possible.

Once done back testing is one heck of a lot faster going through thousands of trades, researching stops. profit targest, varying time intervals, time of day filters, or simply experimenting with another indicator. Having the ability to back test such concepts quickly is a time saver.

I couldn't agree more EFS is powerful indeed, best I've seen for strategy development. Becoming competent in either programming or trading is challenging enough, both together
a rare commodity if ever there was one.

I agree that getting mathematically accurate results from backtestig can be extremely difficult for many. It's taken me more time than I care to acknowledge, and that difficult, but h the help provide in this forum I was able eventuallly get it done

After a few years I just recently began dynamic or autotrading and agree that coding up the rules with which we trade can depending on the complexity can be difficult and not everything can be coded in EFS or any language.

Risk reward, opportunity cost. I have taken a big risk, and the opportunity cost alone was massive for me personally I left a Vice President Poisiton at Goldman Sachs in NYC to dedicate myself 100 percent to automating my own rather then a firms trading strategies.

The reward for having extablished a long term positive returning - low draw down produced by an entirely 100% mechanical automated trading system is significant. If for no other reason then to be able to go fishing, or whatever move you, while the little trade robot does it's thing.

Glen

Announcement

Question about XTL breakout strategy.

Question about XTL breakout strategy.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment