Average trade prices and percentage gains are bolded. For an explanation of the other figures, click here.
Prior to today (Since May 4, 2009):
Cumulative W/L = 59 - 17
Cumulative Non-Compounded Gain = 107.60%
Note: I was forced to combine the trading results from multiple days into one post, because the position wasn't closed on the same day the position was opened.
Las Vegas Sands (July 15 & 16)
Actual Trade
Prices Grouped Weighted by Weighted by
By Broker % $
Buy Pr Sell Pr V1Buy V1Sell V2Buy V2Sell Tot Gain W L Cum W Cum L Cum Gain
6.9200 6.9800 10.30% 15.58% 0.7125 1.0872
6.9200 6.9800 2.11% 4.49% 0.1461 0.3133
6.9200 6.9800 3.96% 3.43% 0.2740 0.2395
6.9200 6.9800 3.17% 4.49% 0.2192 0.3133
6.9200 6.9800 2.90% 4.75% 0.2010 0.3317
6.9200 6.9800 2.64% 32.21% 0.1827 2.2480
6.9200 6.9400 6.07% 35.06% 0.4202 2.4330
6.9090 39.60% 2.7359
6.9500 7.39% 0.5137
6.9500 3.17% 0.2202
6.9500 5.54% 0.3853
6.9500 3.17% 0.2202
6.9500 6.07% 0.4220
6.9000 2.11% 0.1457
6.9800 1.80% 0.1253
100.00% 100.00% 6.9239 6.9660 0.61% 1 60 17 108.21%
How do you figure in commissions, seems most of your trades are "round numbers"
ReplyDeleteSecond comment--Assuming these trades are true and accurate, why do you believe that a trading history (of three months) from almost two years ago is a positive track record?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteCommissions were charged seperately from the trade, on different pages. The commissions were low, however, less than $10.00 each per trade.
Making 500 trades or so, that's less than $5,000 in commission. That might sound like a lot, but that's not much compared to a profit of 300% if you used, say, only $10,000.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteno disrespect meant, but why wouldn't one think that positive results from 1.5 years ago are a positive?
The sample size is so large that a statistical analysis should show that the odds of the results occurring from luck (and not skill) would be very low, less than 5% probably.
In 2009 high frequency trading was common, as it is today. If I could beat them then, why couldn't I do it now?
In fact, the US government today appears to be buying stocks at the moment. That reduces the chances of a loss on a long position.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI've only made one prediction on this site so far, I plan to start full time in the next two weeks.
The one prediction I did make Dec 7 was up about 40% as of last Friday, in less than 2 months.
http://makethesetrades.blogspot.com/2010/12/dec-2010-dec-7.html
Your record of 1.5 years ago, if you could do it then, why did you stop, and why are you wasting your time (and possibly inviting competitive trades) by inviting subscribers.
ReplyDeleteUsing your example on $10,000 start you would make $25K (after commissions). In next three months (before tax time) you would have $35K and make 100K, in next three months, triple that etc, so that by now(approx 2 years later) you would have several gazillion dollars, even after paying taxes on April 15 (for which of course I would file 6 month extensions to avoid harsh penalties)
my bad, it was 300% annualized, not quarterly but even so, your potential profits, reinvesting all your profits, --approximately , even after tax and commissions, in ten years would be gazillions-three to the tenth power, aprox 60 thousand times return on investment before tax, but more since investment is compounding continuously during the year.
ReplyDelete2-the US government is not "buying stocks" generally, but rather bailing out some companies publicly and on the record.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteyou write:
"Your record of 1.5 years ago, if you could do it then, why did you stop, and why are you wasting your time (and possibly inviting competitive trades) by inviting subscribers."
Why would you think that I stopped trading 1.5 years ago? I never made that claim.
And why would you think I would be wasting my time by inviting subscribers? Bizarre.
You claim:
"Using your example on $10,000 start you would make $25K"
How would a 301% profit turn into only a 15,000 profit after commissions?
And why would you assume I'd keep trading with the compounded sum and not put a big chunk of it to the side at one point?
You write:
"2-the US government is not "buying stocks" generally, but rather bailing out some companies publicly and on the record. "
If you really believe that, you should NOT be investing, you don't understand market factors. There is little doubt as to what the government is doing...the market always goes up even on horrible news...and to confirm that, a study found that about $600B of buys since the market ran began are unidentified. They couldn't determine the buyer.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeletethere are many reasons why someone could be trading all this time and not post the entire results: for one, it would be extremely time consuming for one to do that, considering that it took me many many hours to scan in and edit and data enter just 3 months' worth.
Also, benefits from the site don't involve simply subscriber revenue...it involves advertiser revenue and the ability to become noticed and perhaps have access to larger capital levels from institutions!