Machine learning in trading: theory, models, practice and algo-trading - page 157

 
J.B:

1) Well how not a classification, let's take for example 1000 factors, a deep neuronet with well for example 100 outputs that produce probabilities of movements of a given instrument up / down, for different time horizons. Is this a regression? Regression is when the price is predicted.

2) You may use mutual information, while we simply look through the factors and calculate the percentage of each influence on the final forecast, for a specific model, which is even worse. googleNet in terms of sophistication. We don't need regression, we don't give a shit how much exactly an asset will be worth, it complicates the model and makes no sense, the main thing is that for N seconds it will move in the right direction with a given probability.


1) I'm making price predictions (not just price, but price growth) for several horizons.

2) I can't recommend anything here. Someone uses the probability of a move in the right direction, and someone else uses the predicted strength of a move in a given direction. I guess it makes sense that a one-way price move and a 10-point price move in one direction give different results.

 
Alexey Burnakov:

The maximum leverage is yes, 1:100. But I don't use it. I will say it again.

You can't not use the leverage set by the office.
 
Alexey Burnakov:

1) I am making price predictions (not just price, but price increases) for several horizons.

2) I can't recommend anything here. Someone uses the probability of a move in the right direction, and someone uses the predicted strength of a move in a given direction. I guess it makes sense that a one-way price move and a 10-point price move in one direction give different results.

It's an endless search, and that's the interest: one works better than the other, it's a symbiosis of science and creativity. There may be hundreds of functions, from simple increments on different horizons to trend detection/floating, catching anomalies, mode changes, black swans, etc. Then use the results of these subsystems as predictors for meta-systems, etc. Evolution))))

 
Andrey Dik:
You can't not use the leverage provided by the office.

So,

let's look again at the formula for leverage:

Leverage 1:10 is 0.01 (volume per trade) * 100000 (value of 1 lot) * 5 (number of trades) / 500 (deposit).

That is, I'm using 10 times more money to buy currency than I have in my account. In my opinion, it's simple... Or shall we read the definition of leverage?

If a real broker gives me a maximum of 1:2, but I don't want to use it (because of commissions, for example), then I use 1:1 leverage. And if I'm asked how much I earn and at what leverage, I'll say, for example, 25% per year without using borrowed funds, that is trading only on their own. Everything is clear...

 
Alexey Burnakov:

So,

let's look again at the formula for leverage:

Leverage 1:10 is 0.01 (volume per trade) * 100000 (value of 1 lot) * 5 (number of trades) / 500 (deposit).

That is, I'm using 10 times more money to buy currency than I have in my account. In my opinion, it's simple... Or shall we read the definition of leverage?

If a real broker gives me a maximum of 1:2, but I don't want to use it (because of commissions, for example), then I use 1:1 leverage. And if I'm asked how much I earn and at what leverage, I'll say, for example, 25% per year without using borrowed funds, that is trading only on their own. Everything is clear...

If your brokerage firm is letting you use your own funds, it's not your leverage, but your brokerage company's, so to speak. Do you understand?
 
Andrey Dik:
The leverage is not how much you use of your deposit, but how much your brokerage firm lets you use. Do you understand?

I understand. But if someone asks me how much I earn and at what leverage, I will not say that I have an uncle who can give me a leverage of 1:1000, but actually I trade 1:2 and earn 10%... I'll just say, 1:2. And if I take more, the risks won't allow.

And getting back to the context of the question, how much leverage at 40% earnings per year. Let's say I switched firms and another uncle gives me 1:500. Does that change anything? I hope you understand that I'll trade the same 0.01 lot with 500 ?

 
Alexey Burnakov:
I understand. Alexey Burnakov: I understand the question how much I earn and what leverage I use, I will not say that I have an uncle who gives me 1:1000 leverage, but I trade 1:2 and earn 10%... I'll just say, 1:2. I do not have enough risk if I try to trade more.

Usually, when they ask about the leverage, they ask about the leverage of the account that the office has set. The point of such a question is to find out how much money you can use for trading.

And when you ask the maximum drawdown in a deal - how much negative floating profit to the size of the deposit at the moment.

But you don't know what you're talking about, not the leverage or the drawdown.

Alexey Burnakov:

And getting back to the context of the question, how much is the leverage at 40% earnings per year. Let's say I switched firms and another uncle gives me 1:500. Does that change anything? I hope you understand that I will trade with the same 0.01 lot on my 500?

Also, it does not tell you anything, because you do not know what kind of drawdown you are dealing with. Thus, the question of efficient use of funds in the account remains open. I suppose it is not optimal, otherwise the annual profitability would be higher than 35%.

 
Andrey Dik:

Usually, when they ask about the leverage, they ask about the leverage of the account that the office has set. The point of such a question is to find out how much money you can use for trading.

And when you ask the maximum drawdown in a trade - how much negative floating profit is negative to the size of the deposit at the moment.

1) But you do not understand what you are talking about - neither the leverage, nor the drawdown.

2) This also does not indicate anything, because we do not know the drawdown allowed in the transaction. So the question of the efficient use of funds in the account remains open. My guess is that it's not optimal, otherwise the annual profitability would be higher than 35%.


1) I'm talking specifically about leverage. In other words, how much money I can afford to borrow in order to trade. I hope it's clear that if I always open the whole cut (500 * 100 / 100000 = 0.5 lots), and do it all the time, I probably have such a cool system that I almost never see drawdowns...

2) this shows that whatever leverage the office gave me, and consequently, no matter how big a deal I can open, I will open a strictly set volume in order to save the risks. All the rest is your wild speculation.

 
Alexey Burnakov:

1) I'm talking specifically about leverage. In other words, how much money I can afford to borrow in order to trade. I hope it is clear that if I always open the whole cut (500 * 100 / 100000 = 0.5 lots), and would do it all the time, I probably have such a cool system that I almost do not see drawdowns ...

2) this shows that whatever leverage the office gave me, and consequently, no matter how big a deal I can open, I will open a strictly set volume in order to save the risks. All the rest is your wild speculation.

I see. If you don't want to answer, don't.

For the construction of a trading system, the knowledge of what a leverage may not be very important, but for the general outlook still need to know. Otherwise you may lack knowledge in crosvalidations and regressions but in elementary things in trading.

 

A-----i. Clearly shows "Leverage Used".

Reason: