Re: XARD - Simple Trend Following Trading System

1984
ImpLaNT wrote: Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:43 pm Dear Sir Xard ...
The latest versions of your system (grail versions) give unreasonably many false signals to enter a position. This can be seen from the image below.
Only yesterday on the DJI there were 3 such signals. (Naturally, before each signal there was a red dot with a white arrow inside, just at the time the picture was taken from the chart, the point is in the current position)

Screenshot_7.png

First of all, I attribute this to the fact that the current settings of the indicators that make up the MA indicator are very aggressive, as a result of which they become overly sensitive and give a lot of false signals.
Secondly, in new versions of the system, you abandoned the rule to enter a position only from the second point of a minor semaphore. In my opinion, this is the main mistake, because any reliable system should somehow be tied to wave analysis. The use of the second point, even if not to the fullest, but still realized this function.
Thirdly, in the pursuit of ease of use, you have abandoned many points that together made your previous setups stably profitable. Simple primitive systems are not stably profitable!
In conclusion, I want to say, that the last quality version, in my opinion, with excellent component balancing was the Christmas setup, and the heart of this system, the Mav2 indicator, is a true masterpiece. In the future, I slightly modified this setup by adding Markers and Cycle Channels indicators, as well as another indicators for additional filtering for more precision to enter in sub window. As a result, in my opinion, a fairly reliable system was obtained. Yes - complex visually, yes - with complex entry rules, but giving 90% of the correct entry into the position and allowing you to hold a profitable position for as long as possible, which is important enough to trade instruments with strong and deep movements, such as indices.

Screenshot_8.png

Based on the foregoing, I urge you to abandon the principle of simplicity, and return to the principles of reinforced concrete reliability. So that if the system gives a signal, the trader enters the deal without any doubts and fears. Let these signals be rare and complex, but for that reliable. And whoever needs it, they will figure it out in a complex system. And recklessly following the principle of simplicity, you can reduce the accuracy of the entrance to a coin toss (eagle or tails)
1. This is an excellent analysis of a complex problem and to the point. I think it's very helpful.
2. As far as I can see the false entries are all due to the fact that the zigzag/box/semafor produce false trend signals. The candles and the MA aren't the problem because they just indicate entry (buy) and exit (Pb) but not directional bias (i. e. trade long or short) - within the logic of Xard's system laid out in the rules.
(Of course, if the MA/candles are too fast there are too many entries and exits; so slippage eats up all possible profits but that is a different topic altogether)
3. So - to my mind - simplicity isn't the problem but reading the repainting indicator correctly (which sometimes - like yesterday - is near to impossible for the untrained). Possibly Murray Maths could be one way of getting around the semafor problem (or TDI, or Stoch, or... - but they all pose other problems themselves). Xard uses/used all these already.
(If you look at the trade advice some people gave to struggling traders just before you posted, you may find that all their explanations were about all sorts of things traders should and must take into account - but strangely - all on top of the specific system laid out by Xard: once again - to my mind - they all try to circumvent or argue around the general problem of repainters' signals by enumerating analytical tools - and distributing lengthy manuscripts - that are not part of the trading system).
Occam's razor suggests: it is not always complexity that solves a problem but precise analysis of the problem itself.
But these are only my ideas - and I may be totally wrong.


Re: XARD - Simple Trend Following Trading System

1986
josi wrote: Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:53 pm

1. This is an excellent analysis of a complex problem and to the point. I think it's very helpful.
2. As far as I can see the false entries are all due to the fact that the zigzag/box/semafor produce false trend signals. The candles and the MA aren't the problem because they just indicate entry (buy) and exit (Pb) but not directional bias (i. e. trade long or short) - within the logic of Xard's system laid out in the rules.
(Of course, if the MA/candles are too fast there are too many entries and exits; so slippage eats up all possible profits but that is a different topic altogether)
3. So - to my mind - simplicity isn't the problem but reading the repainting indicator correctly (which sometimes - like yesterday - is near to impossible for the untrained). Possibly Murray Maths could be one way of getting around the semafor problem (or TDI, or Stoch, or... - but they all pose other problems themselves). Xard uses/used all these already.
(If you look at the trade advice some people gave to struggling traders just before you posted, you may find that all their explanations were about all sorts of things traders should and must take into account - but strangely - all on top of the specific system laid out by Xard: once again - to my mind - they all try to circumvent or argue around the general problem of repainters' signals by enumerating analytical tools - and distributing lengthy manuscripts - that are not part of the trading system).
Occam's razor suggests: it is not always complexity that solves a problem but precise analysis of the problem itself.
But these are only my ideas - and I may be totally wrong.
Please, for the x-th time. The Semafor, as any zig zag, is NOT A TRADING SIGNAL! It moves with the price and shows highs and lows of the current TF and in mtf mode of higher TFs. That's it. Period! Thus there are no correct or false signals, not does it constitute a problem. Knowing that a trend may continue till the next ice age, so to speak, one can't just go long or short when a Dot appears. That's nonsense. When the price reaches a major S/D level we may expect that the bias changes. It does so often. If not, well, SL protects our funds and we move to "next". Marking SD levels on high TFs is actually enough for trading. Price action tends to return to those levels and you can scroll back to Jesus Christ and still can see interaction of buyers and sellers at such levels. Based on that, you actually don't need any indicators.
Xards Template is meant as a guidance, not a trading decision maker for you. There is no such system out there. One also needs a basic trading education and practice. Remember, we trade high probabilities as nobody knows what happenes next unless we could see the incoming orders.
Just my 3 Cents.
These users thanked the author RplusT for the post:
Rumi

Re: XARD - Simple Trend Following Trading System

1987
"Please, for the x-th time. The Semafor, as any zig zag, is NOT A TRADING SIGNAL! It moves with the price and shows highs and lows of the current TF and in mtf mode of higher TFs. That's it. Period! Thus there are no correct or false signals, not does it constitute a problem. Knowing that a trend may continue till the next ice age, so to speak, one can't just go long or short when a Dot appears. That's nonsense. When the price reaches a major S/D level we may expect that the bias changes. It does so often. If not, well, SL protects our funds and we move to "next". Marking SD levels on high TFs is actually enough for trading. Price action tends to return to those levels and you can scroll back to Jesus Christ and still can see interaction of buyers and sellers at such levels. Based on that, you actually don't need any indicators.
Xards Template is meant as a guidance, not a trading decision maker for you. There is no such system out there. One also needs a basic trading education and practice. Remember, we trade high probabilities as nobody knows what happenes next unless we could see the incoming orders.
Just my 3 Cents."

Ever so nice to get your 3 cents and in such a polite tone, too....
Did you take the time and read Xard's trading rules for the new setup?
Of course, you will say, you did, and so much more, too.
And yet it starts: If the ZZ LINE is at bottom then all your trades are up....
What does this mean? Well, the ZZ LINE follows the dots (zigzag,Semafor...).
So how does the Xard-system - according to its own rules - use this zigzag line? Well, as a directional bias (...if a then place trades only in ... direction).
I know that the Semafor is more often than not no signal (because it moves along with the price until the direction of the price changes).
But the rules are the rules and they tell us to change directional bias once the ZZ-LINE is at the bottom or the top.
It's good that your rules are different, because those seem to help you to avoid the problem.
But if people follow the trading rules they will sometimes run into problems, i. e. yesterday.
So, instead of telling people for the x-th time what you do and what you think;
think about adapting the existing trading rules in such a way that this problem can be avoided.
And if you come up with a simple and precise solution, propose it to Xard.
The rest doesn't have any trading relevance because it doesn't relate to Xard's system, as far as I can see.
I take it - speaking from experience - that quite a number of contributions will be erased shortly.
These users thanked the author josi for the post:
normannasty

Re: XARD - Simple Trend Following Trading System

1988
josi wrote: Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:53 pmOccam's razor suggests: it is not always complexity that solves a problem but precise analysis of the problem itself.
Could it be that the "struggling traders" you mentioned are part of the problem? Have any stopped to analyze themselves, as well as what the persuit of trading actually requires?

I really hope people don't think they can quickly plug in a system and start nailing every turn in the market. We also have many that aren't willing to read the thread, and there are those eagerly awaiting another future version, as if any of the previous versions aren't good enough for trend trading!

josi wrote: Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:53 pm (If you look at the trade advice some people gave to struggling traders just before you posted, you may find that all their explanations were about all sorts of things traders should and must take into account - but strangely - all on top of the specific system laid out by Xard: once again - to my mind - they all try to circumvent or argue around the general problem of repainters' signals by enumerating analytical tools - and distributing lengthy manuscripts - that are not part of the trading system).
I thought what Senior Rob said was very relevent and apt for the discussion. After all, this is a trend trading system, and he gave core principles on how trends are traded.

I'm not sure about what trading education/experience most of the "struggling traders" you mentioned have, but I wish them the very best of luck if they are trying to trade without any.

For me, it would be like a chess master giving me a really great chess strategy but I don't fully understand chess rules and have no in-game experience. I wouldn't have any skill/awareness/knowledge to be able to convincingly implement the strategy. It can't be a coincidence that many traders using this system successfully already have some grounding.

I respect that you want to trade the system standalone. Sincerely good luck with that.

Re: XARD - Simple Trend Following Trading System

1989
Rumi wrote: Wed Mar 25, 2020 11:42 pm

Could it be that the "struggling traders" you mentioned are part of the problem? Have any stopped to analyze themselves, as well as what the persuit of trading actually requires?

I really hope people don't think they can quickly plug in a system and start nailing every turn in the market. We also have many that aren't willing to read the thread, and there are those eagerly awaiting another future version, as if any of the previous versions aren't good enough for trend trading!




I thought what Senior Rob said was very relevent and apt for the discussion. After all, this is a trend trading system, and he gave core principles on how trends are traded.

I'm not sure about what trading education/experience most of the "struggling traders" you mentioned have, but I wish them the very best of luck if they are trying to trade without it.

For me, it would be like getting a really great chess strategy but I don't fully understand chess rules and have no in-game experience. I wouldn't be able to fully implement the strategy because I don't know what I'm *really* doing in the first place. It can't be a coincidence that many traders using this system successfully already have some grounding.

I respect that you want to trade the system standalone. Sincerely good luck with that.
1. It is a trading system: so you trade the system
2. If you need more than the system - then the system is incomplete
3. If what you say is correct then you may trade much more than the Xard system - but that simply means that you have a more complicated system (of which Xard's would be one element)
4. If the system has flaws (or missing elements - like almost any system will have at the beginning) the way to go is to improve it until it works sufficiently.
5. To state that you do "things differently" and start to "refer to your surplus knowledge" and "all the things that are also important" does definitely nothing to improve the system if you are not willing to integrate all these elements into the system (but not in a vague way - "support and resistance is extremely relevant", "Murray Maths can be so helpful" etc - because you need rules and no personal - mostly pretty heroic narratives about personal diligence and sacrifice... - experience)
So whether you believe that something somebody said is extremely relevant is actually quite irrelevant if it cannot be made part of the trading system. That's what is called anecdotal.
Knowledge that cannot be analysed (taken apart) and transfered into smaller units (rules) that can be followed is no knowledge but intuition (or a heuristic approach - like Kahnemann described it in Slow Thinking, Fast Thinking)
These users thanked the author josi for the post:
Skyold

Re: XARD - Simple Trend Following Trading System

1990
josi wrote: Thu Mar 26, 2020 12:19 am 1. It is a trading system: so you trade the system
2. If you need more than the system - then the system is inomplete
3. If what you say is correct then you may trade much more than the system - but that simply means that you have a more complicated system (of which Xard's would be one element)
4. If the system has flaws (or missing elements - like almost any system will have at the beginning) the way to go is to improve it until it works sufficiently.
5. To state that you do "things differently" and start to "refer to your surplus knowledge" and "all the things that are also important" does definitely nothing to improve the system if you are not willing to integrate all these elements into the system (but not in a vague way - "support and resistanc is extremely relevant", "Murray Maths can be so helpful" etc - because you need rules and no personal - mostly pretty heroic narratives about personal diligence and sacrifice...)
So whether you believe that something somebody said is extremely relevant is actually quite irrelevant if it cannot be made part of the trading system. That's what is called anecdotal.
But then again - who cares about logic if she/he can ramble him/herself through the day.
My ramble(!) I was simply trying to help, without being sarcastic or sounding heroic.

I'm not going to ruin the thread further. Again, good luck and happy trading.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BillyIdol, brendons, funchi, knglerxst, MarcoGee, Narutopips and 68 guests