Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Future

Quant Funds and Automated Trading Strategies

Recommended Posts

There was a topic somewhere on the boards about insitutions automating their trading more and more. Hence discretionary traders are amongst the rare breeds in many insitutional firms. The recent subprime problem has lead to a domino effect leading many hedge funds to post massive losses.

 

These funds are whats called Quant Funds that use automated computer models to trade in various equities and markets. The article from bloomberg about Goldman Sachs Global Equity fund explains their automated strategies of long/short. Article: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=atrLyIlkKSjg

 

Futher information regarding this strategy can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_/_short_equity

 

The second article is about Citigroup which may also be in trouble of around $3billion in losses: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ahW1pLE7WZ7I&refer=home

 

What interests me is the $3billion "rescue package" of Goldman Sachs fund. Furthermore, a fund that just lost 26% or so states "We don't think the strategy is going to change". With volatility going back to where it was, it is possible that Goldmans fund will recover. However, what intrigued me was how these so called mathematic based fund managers/traders/programmers have this much faith in their automated models. Did it never occur to them to view the market with their own eye? It seems like day traders are more informed of current market conditions becaus we breathe it tick by tick.

 

These funds go on to post 10-15% returns annually, yet when they lose over 25% in a matter of weeks their reason is "the models (ours included) are behaving in the opposite way we would predict and have seen and tested for over very long time periods (45+ years)". This sort of excuse is unacceptable in my opinion. A good trader is informed of market sentiment changes. A good trader can distinguish opportunities vs warnings. A good trader will know something doesnt seem right. These bots will never know what hit them until they are down in the hole and unable to unwind their positions. It seems like history repeats itself over and over again. Did we all not learn from LTCM crisis? I personally find it unacceptable that fund managers are panicking worldwide. Should they even be appointed as fund managers?

 

I understand hedge funds with that much capital must apply different strategies. But I think it would be beneficial for investors and the securities market if these funds simply hired and listened to a good discretionary trader instead of loading the boat over computerized strategies. Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are in a "Quant bubble" right now. I noticed that last year looking at the autumn gold ctas that it seemed like a dirty word to put anything other than "0% discretionary" when it came to strategy. The no name state university here now has a "financial engineering" degree. When you have billions and billions all doing the same stat arb mean reversion stuff it seems like someone is going to have to be left holding the bag. Its not like these strategies are so mysterious. I've read Rentech model how they themselves will effect the markets from using their models but I don't think you can model what will happen to your model when everyone else is using the same model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been many questions about the markets being automated little by little and leaving discretionary traders as a bunch of minority lose cannons (Soultrader brought up this topic a while back). I think it is going this way, but the fundamental problem remains is who owns the money that they're losing? Machines? Computers? or Humans? If they answer correctly, then it's down to human psychology driving the markets, not machines (I've never seen a machine screaming "Oh my GOD, I'm losing millions, I got to scale down, scale down!!!!!). Of course the end result is the investors lose the money but Wall St. keep ticking with their fees and comms. End game: no matter how you play, they win.

 

Maybe we'll go back to basics. This is due to the fact that quant has enjoyed a nice bull market. Heck, anyone can make money at this point, engineer or not. Once the cycle changes (i.e. volatility, bearish, consolidation, range-bounce, what have you), that's when the real test on which funds/traders can cut it. This was exactly happened up til the tech bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That video posted up a while ago on the forums about the crash of Long Term Capital was great. Putting 100% faith in a rigid system is a recipe for disaster. There are countless philosophies across a wide range of disciplines which derride rigidity as the downfall of any person or system. Look at Bruce Lee's philosophies on martial arts!

 

Like torero said, in a bull market you don't need much skill to make money, discretionary or automatic. For a while now these automatic systems have enjoyed the run up and the programmers have been taking the praise. However with the recent volatility, and the market falling like a knife (just try picking the bottom on this one!) these systems aren't coping. They are too rigid.

 

All automatic systems are based upon the thoughs of humans. Their advantage is that when it comes time to act the system will act without hesitation. However what a distretionary trader has an advantage over is in adaptation. A discretionary trader would have made a killing over the last 24-25 days where as these large funds are posting losses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That video posted up a while ago on the forums about the crash of Long Term Capital was great. Putting 100% faith in a rigid system is a recipe for disaster. There are countless philosophies across a wide range of disciplines which derride rigidity as the downfall of any person or system. Look at Bruce Lee's philosophies on martial arts!

 

Like torero said, in a bull market you don't need much skill to make money, discretionary or automatic. For a while now these automatic systems have enjoyed the run up and the programmers have been taking the praise. However with the recent volatility, and the market falling like a knife (just try picking the bottom on this one!) these systems aren't coping. They are too rigid.

 

All automatic systems are based upon the thoughs of humans. Their advantage is that when it comes time to act the system will act without hesitation. However what a distretionary trader has an advantage over is in adaptation. A discretionary trader would have made a killing over the last 24-25 days where as these large funds are posting losses.

 

Yes very true about adapting to market conditions and adjusting strategies. This is something discretionary traders clearly have an edge over automated bots. Fund managers fear volatility while day traders crave for it. For those who havent got a chance to watch the LTCM documentary take a look here: http://www.traderslaboratory.com/videos/Trillion%20Dollar%20Bet%20Nova.wmv

 

Its a great documentary so worth your time. If anyone else has any financial films/documentary it would be appreciated as it is relatively hard for me to obtain them here in Japan.

 

I also want to add that learning market profile gives traders a tremendous edge even if its just analyzing end of day market action. Day by day thorough analysis gets you in the zone and alert to changing market conditions. Although candles and volume do help, being able to visualize a profile can offer clues not visible through just a volume and price chart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Market Profile has been one of the hardest things that I've been trying to learn. Initially I thought it would be as easy as treating them as pivot points...how wrong I was! The information generated by a developing market profile is priceless if you're good enough to spot what type of profile is developping. An automated bot can't do that in real time effectively. The only way a bot can analyse MP is to have someone plug in some paramaters which identify a market as either being balanced, trending, range extension etc.. and therefore will always be making its decisions in retrospect to an already developed profile!

 

I have no idea how I'm going to begin to speed up recognition of MP development, I guess just keep on staring at it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think these funds are another reason people should invest their own money with their own wits and knowledge. Most of us got caught up in the tech bubble (guilty here!) so another 10 years or so, another batch of wall street guys pitch the same spiel again to catch the next wave of losing funds. We sure have short memories don't we?

 

As for MP, reading the book is opening up new ideas for me. I'm already using the POC with success so can't say it's useless anymore. I'm going to delve into it more tasty setups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Market acts in a non-linear form, for years, mathmatians have being trying to solve non-linear problem, If it can be solved, those big investment firms would have paid what ever price to get it. but so far it remains a challenge for them.

 

Since so far it has no solution to solve a non-linear form, then next best thing they come up with is quant fund which is to build a model, with some assumptions that gambler's ruin would have 1/1000000 chance of happening(I made up that number, but the logic is that it is small enough that it would not happen).

 

"gambler's ruin" - It is gurantee 100% to happen if you play it long enough, no matter how small the chance it is.

 

any good statistian knows about this rules, and guess what, with more and more quant funds out here, the "gamble's ruin" that will go against them gets bigger and biggers.

 

Another other thing about building a model, it can never formulate all conditions into its mathmatic formulaed model. To make long story short, Non-linear form can not be solved by mathmatic, thus market action can not be solve by any mathmatic. Given it long enough time, it will run into that "Gambler's ruin" condition.

 

weiwei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Risk of Ruin or Gamblers Ruin as you describe it is the most important statistic you can be aware of. Even discretionary traders with long enough statistics can work it out. Of course the art is to stop long before you are close to ruin and re-evaluate whether your method and/or models are still working. Recognising you (discretionary) or your system (quant) is operating outside 'normal' parameters is time for serious action

 

Recalculating RoR based on current performance may be shocking enough to pull he plug immediately.

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.