Any afl with small target but sure

[Smart_trade]

I just ask is there any AFL which gives
Small profit but sure. 90 or 80% is differ
Matter . But I think some people take
In other way . Helping people try to help
I didn't ask any magic AFL but here many
People think I m asking magic AFL.

Friends again I just ask is there any AFL
Which gives small profit but sure.
Sure means 70-90%.

Simple strategy is buy in the money puts when a pivot low is broken in Nifty Fut 5 min charts and exit in Rs 2-3 profits...you should also exit if there is rs 2 to 3 loss.

Similarly, buy in the money calls when pivot high in 5 min chart of Nifty Future gets taken out....Book 2-3 points profits...stops 2-3 points.

This will require high percentage of winners to stay profitable...but this strategy will give high hit rate. Options give you advantage of lower transaction cost compared to futures.


Smart_trade

 

[touchraj16]

ST Da, but how to apply MM rule trading in option? plz

 

[Happy_Singh]

suppose if we buy xyz stock @ 500 and i wana small profit ( .35%) 1.75rs
and that 1.75 should be achivable and stoploss also be 1.75 rs but target comes should be 90% time.
i just wana such afl breakout for small target.

OK now i understand what you want

You want a system with . . .

Win-Loss ratio of - - - 90:10

Risk-Reward ratio - - - - 1:1

It would be tough to match your requirements

A system that has win-loss ratio of just under 1/2, maybe 45% wining trades, but generating a RR of 3, is a better bet to achieve but this kind of RR not able to get purely on intraday basis so try something on swing trading.

A side note

The market behavior does not remain constant. Based on all the different market conditions, the AFL should automatically generate the buy/sell/short/cover signals taking different market conditions into consideration, along with all this, the scrip selection etc should be also done automatically by the AFL. All this will take deep knowledge about the markets, prolong studies and intense effort in coding it, now after doing all that what could be the possible motivation to share on a public platform?

Anyway if someone does end up sharing if not an AFL, even a good concept then this discussions can be considered fruitful.

Happy

 

[Shailu]

OK friends thanks for ur help.

 

[abcpankaj]

with risk reward ratio 1:1 anything above 70-75% winners will be exceptionally good.
90% imho is very difficult.

 

[Happy_Singh]

with risk reward ratio 1:1 anything above 70-75% winners will be exceptionally good.
90% imho is very difficult.

With small profits, an RR of 1:1 actually becomes 0.8:1.2 when the costs of trading is added to the equation on both sides, so even of you get 60% winners it becomes BE.

Now what happens when we also consider slippage to the mix ?

Considering cost & slippage the BE with a 1:1 system shifts to 75%,

The requirement of the OP seems to be fair to me , yes difficult to achieve and definitely not practical to expect it for nothing from some one here . . .

But same or even slightly better expectancy can be achieved from a swing system few of them are freely explained here

Really / truly understanding it is the first step to being able to trade.


Happy

 

[Happy_Singh]

Expectancy

Expectancy = (Probability of Win * Average Win) / (Probability of Loss * Average Loss)

Case I: Intraday system

Probability of Win = 80%
Probability of Loss = 20%

Average Win = 10 points
Average Loss = 10 points

Cost on each side(brokerage + slippage) = 2 to 3 point (average slippage is 1-2 points)

so net effect on Avg win/loss is

Average Win = 10 points - 2 points = 08 points
Average Loss = 10 points + 2 points = 12 points

Expectancy = ((90 * 8) - (10 * 12) )/ 100 = 0.6


Case II: Swing System

A win/loss of 35% and a RR of 3:1
Assumption avg win 60 / loss 20 points / cost slippage is same

Expectancy = ((35 * 58) - (65 * 22)) /100 = 0.6

i.e. for same expectancy we need a win % of just 35% .


Other Factors
Although the expectancy maybe same,

for the swing system we have almost 1/3 numbers of winners, so on the tradability factor the intraday system wins hands-on

for the swing system the draw-down will be much more, so on this factor also the intraday system wins
add to that the over-night risk, making the swing system definitely more difficult to trade.

Further the leverage that can be used on intraday systems cannot be used on swing system.

And the most important factor: The frequency of opportunity is very high for intraday v/s swing systems and that makes an intra-day system much more desirable for a trader

Looking at the above, we traders may never stop looking for the 90% intra-day system, and those who find will never tell

Happy

 

[abcpankaj]

Totally agree that systems with better 'expectancy' can be easily made.
But I find it practically difficult to stick with discipline with a less winning ratio system.String of consecutive losses & I start second guessing the trades.

not only intraday even a swing /positional system with RR 1:1 & win ratio >75 % seems difficult (not impossible) to me.
Of course 1 can curve fit , add too may buy conditions & get the aforementioned numbers theoretically .But that will reduce the no. of trades & it be difficult to get the same results in real life.

Thanks for your reply.

regards,

 

[Shailu]

IT IS KINDLY REQUEST IF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAN LEAVE IT. DONT BE TANSED BE HAPPY ALWAYS. :thumb:

 

[mastermind007]

IT IS KINDLY REQUEST IF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE THAN LEAVE IT. DONT BE TANSED BE HAPPY ALWAYS. :thumb:

Did you bother to read my post earlier? I actually gave you a link to the system ....