Window Mobile Metatrader

This is a software metatrader for Window Mobile Pocket PC, the new version:
Download

INTERMEZZO "Paid to Click" program

I have been search all of topic about making money online, and there is something interesting me about PAID TO CLICK. If you click advertising on “Paid to Click Program” everyday (spare your time about one hour). I guarantee you will get around $100-$300 per month consistently.

Relatively register in PAID TO CLICK Program is easy. I will give you link a good program below and just follow the instruction to register.

How about a payment? a Payment in this program usually use internet payment service, i suggest you must have Paypal and e-gold. After you get the money in your account balance on the Paid to Click Program, you can withdrawals to your account Paypal and/or e-gold (From Paypal and/or e-gold you can transfer to your bank account of your country).

The program PAID to CLICK, i suggest is;

• signupcorner.com
• 5centminimum.com
• cash-clicks.org
• milkywayclicks.com
• clicksalary.com
• earnbymails.com
• donkeymails.com
• no-minimum.com
• jillsclickcorner.com
• easy-ptr.com
• worldwide-cash.net
• aglocomails.com
• bux.to
• clixmania.net
• paidclicks.ws
• titanclicks.com
• clixsense.com

If you have a problem with this program let me help you to guide with send to message in comment this articles. I hope this articles will help you to generate other income every month.

cheers

Personality and Trend-Following

I would describe my approach to trading as research-based trend following. By that I mean that I attempt to ride strength or weakness in the market after it has been manifested. I do not, however, automatically assume that any trend is my friend. Instead, I use historical research to distinguish between trending movements that are likely to continue and those with a high probability of reversal. This is a highly disciplined approach to trading in that it requires significant research and preparation time, as well as an ability to stick with market movements and one’s game plan.

In my book HOW I CAN TRIPLE MY MONEY IN FOREX MARKET, I referred to personality traits that tend to distinguish successful traders from less successful ones. Several of these traits are also likely to influence the degree of success traders are likely to have in adopting a trend-following approach to trading. Below are several self-assessment questions that might be useful in determining whether you’ll face particularly great challenges in riding market trends. Please write down “yes” or “no” answers to each of the twelve questions before reading further:

1. When something goes against you in the market, do you often find yourself venting your frustration?
2. Do you enjoy (or as a child did you enjoy) roller coasters or other thrill rides?
3. Do you often find yourself procrastinating over work?
4. Do you consider yourself moody—sometimes rather up, sometimes rather down?
5. Would you generally prefer going out and partying with friends rather than staying at home with a good book or movie?
6. Do you often find yourself apologizing to others because you forgot to do something you were supposed to do?
7. Are you generally high-strung, tense, or stressed?
8. If given the choice at a buffet, would you prefer to try exotic foods you’ve never heard of rather than familiar dishes?
9. When you have a task that needs to be done around the house, do you tend to take a quick and dirty approach, rather than a meticulous, painstaking approach?
10. After a losing trade, do you often feel guilty or get down on yourself?
11. Have you experimented with or regularly used two or more recreational drugs (other than alcohol) in your life?
12. Are you often late for appointments or for social plans you’ve made?

If you indicated “yes” to most or all of questions 1, 4, 7, and 10, you most likely score high on a trait called “neuroticism”. Neuroticism is the tendency toward negative emotional experience, and it shows up as anger, anxiety, or depression.

If you responded “yes” to most or all of questions 2, 5, 8 and 11, you probably score high on a trait called “openness to experience”. Openness reflects a tendency toward sensation seeking and risk-taking.

If you answered “yes” to most or all of questions 3, 6, 9, and 12, you potentially score low on a trait called “conscientiousness”. Conscientiousness measures the degree to which an individual is oriented toward duty, responsibility, and dependability.

Other things being equal, the ideal personality pattern for trend following is one of high conscientiousness, low neuroticism, and low openness. A good trend-follower will stick with rules and systems (conscientious), won’t impulsively enter or exit trades on the whim of emotion (neuroticism), and will trade for profits, not stimulation (low openness). In my experience, some of the best systems traders are among the least flashy people. They are meticulous and conscientious about their research and execution, and they don’t let their emotions or needs pull them from their discipline.

Conversely, individuals who are high risk-takers and who crave novelty, stimulation, and action often take impulsive and imprudent risks. Very frequently, the neurotic emotions kick in after a series of losing high-risk trades. Such individuals are trading for excitement and self-validation, not just profits. Even if they are given a tested, profitable trading system, they will not be able to follow it faithfully.

System traders often focus their research and energy on defining the optimal parameters for a system’s profitability. Equally important is finding a trading strategy that meshes with one’s personality. Traders who are relatively risk-averse may trade shorter time frames and/or smaller positions than those who are risk-tolerant. Traders with a higher need for novelty and stimulation may benefit from trading a greater number of stocks and/or markets rather than focusing on a relative few. Are some personalities simply unsuited for trading? I would say yes, just as some personalities are not cut out to be fighter pilots or surgeons. It is difficult to imagine a trader enjoying ongoing success without the capacity for disciplined risk-taking.

It is not at all unusual to find that a trader is losing with a trend following approach because he or she is acting out unmet personality needs in the market. One of the best trading strategies one can employ is to find adequate outlets for attention/affection, achievement, self-esteem, emotional well being, and excitement outside of trading. Sometimes traders I talk with try to impress me by explaining that trading is their entire life. They do not realize that their very “passion” and “obsession” with the markets are likely to sabotage them, imposing undue pressures and interference. If you have a trading system and you faithfully execute that system, trading should be reasonably boring and routine. Better to enjoy roller coasters outside of market hours than ride them with your equity curve!

Last Exit for the Lost

I’m encountering frequent tales of the demise of once-successful “daytraders” of the futures markets, which perhaps had me thinking of The Fields of the Nephilim when I titled this piece.

Here is what I believe:

As an increasing number of players swarm to a recognized trading “edge”, this creates new patterns of over-reaction and under-reaction in the markets and fresh sources of “edge”.

The new sources of “edge” are always diametrically opposed to the old ones. Where the edge had been momentum plays with growth stocks, the new edge can be found in fading low volatility markets. The erstwhile edge in harvesting ticks from inefficient markets yields way to an advantage trading the more protracted overreactions of these short-term players.

The insight I had on Friday was that the patterns defining the current edge are not resolvable into the terms of the previous advantage. They are emergent phenomena, to draw upon a concept from systems theory. No amount of counting and categorizing pixels on a television set can yield insight into the meaning of a broadcast; the laws that capture the firing of neurons cannot speak to the content of resulting thought. The overreactions of today’s traders form a larger pattern that becomes tomorrow’s source of alpha. The larger pattern cannot be seen from within the perspective of current traders.

Yesterday’s heroes always hope to hold on to their dying edge by blending the old with the new—oblivious to the fact that the new derives its edge precisely from the excesses of the old. Shades of Kuhn and paradigm shifts…

Carl McCoy is growling “Love Under Will”: a song about goodbyes at the graveside. I visualize the book in the eminis—the thick size and the frantic pulling and hitting of bids and offers—and I can see yesterday’s traders desperately hoping to catch the next few ticks. Like the Nephilim contemplating life in the cracks and hollows, I’m resigned to the reality that “someone’s gonna suffer.”

Explaining Market Success

Numerous books have been written on the topic of trading success. Nevertheless, it is unclear how expert traders obtain their expertise. Several explanatory models are implicit in market writings:

1) The psychological model – What makes great traders, this model asserts, is self-mastery. Great traders don’t necessarily possess better trading methods or secrets, but apply common wisdom more consistently, with less emotional interference, and therefore with better risk management. Developing trading expertise is a function of developing oneself in this model.

2) The scientific model – What makes great traders according to this model is superior research. Markets exhibit cause-effect relationships, and these relationships shift over time. The role of research is to uncover these patterns and capitalize upon them. Such a model is, in a sense, the opposite of the psychological model. It hypothesizes that, once you discover inefficiencies in the marketplace, these can be incorporated into mechanical systems that eliminate any troublesome human elements from trading.

3) The hidden pattern model – Success in the marketplace, this model emphasizes, is a function of understanding. Patterns exist in the marketplace that do not shift over time, but also that are not necessarily observable on the surface. The role of the great trader is to successfully decipher and apply these universal patterns. This is not so much a function of research as experience; such approaches to trading as charting, Elliott Wave, and Market Profile are not systematic approaches to trading, but instead rely on the trader’s interpretive skill.

4) The performance model – Trading is viewed as a performance activity, like athletics, in this model. Successful trading can be broken down into component skills and attitudes that can be honed through intensive exposure and practice. Expertise is less a function of explicit research or pattern-based interpretation as rapid execution of perceptual and motor skills.

No doubt each of these models possesses elements of the truth, and it is quite possible that all of these models represent a portion of what it means to be a great trader, not unlike the descriptions of the elephant offered by the proverbial blind men. Models one and four emphasize qualities of the trader; models two and three stress the underlying qualities of the marketplace.

In a sense, these models are like lenses that traders wear, shaping how they view the world and prioritizing what they work on. They reflect deep belief structures about the nature of the world: whether reality is fixed (capable of being captured by universal patterns) or changing (capable of being captured through ongoing research); whether knowledge is explicit (obtained through psychological reflection) or implicit (reflected in performance).

Because these models of market success are drawn from our fundamental views of the world, I suspect that they are far less amenable to modification than is commonly appreciated. A researcher will be turned off by Elliott Wave theory not because of objective evidence (which the researcher finds lacking and the Elliotician sees aplenty), but because the very notion of fixed, unchanging Platonian realities does not mesh with a perspective that emphasizes dynamic interrelationships. To a trader who views trading expertise in performance terms, the idea that success is a function of mindset simply does not register: Can one become a good surgeon through self-development? And yet can one perform without the right internal harmony (as the recent experience of the Los Angeles Lakers demonstrated)?

Perhaps the successful trader differs from the unsuccessful one, not because of the superiority of one model over another, but because he or she has found a model for professional development that fits with his or her basic personality, outlook, and experience sets. The unsuccessful trader may lack a coherent model altogether—impulsively shifting from working on self to working on market, working on research to working on discretionary interpretation. Or unsuccessful traders may pursue models that utterly conflict with their fundamental personalities traits and life experiences, as in the case of intuitive individuals who attempt to force their trading into mechanical schemes.

In that sense, the models are like religions: There may be multiple paths toward spiritual growth, but it is necessary to find a path that speaks to you. One cannot be a devout Christian one day, a disciplined Zen practitioner the next, and still later an Orthodox Jew. By asking fundamental questions—Where is opportunity in the marketplace? What competencies do I need to capitalize on this opportunity?—you can begin to grind your own lenses and formulate a plan for furthering your success.

Risk and Success

Sometimes you hear people debate whether trading success is attributable more to trading techniques vs. psychology. The answer, of course, is both—but the point where the two intersect is risk management. A huge percentage of trading success or failure can be laid at the doorstep of risk management. A recent book on risk management (that I’ll be reviewing next week) observed that, across different traders and trading firms, 90% of all profits were attributable to 10% of all trades. While traders would like to think of themselves as making money on a majority of their trades, the reality for frequent traders is that a minority of trades are winners—and it is the few large winners that produce a favorable profit/loss statement (P/L).

The book goes on to observe that, if 10% of trades account for a majority of profits, it follows that a large percentage of trades have to be “scratched”. A cardinal skill in trading is recognizing that a trade is wrong before it hurts the P/L. Time and again, I have seen good traders exit trades when the trades fail to move in their direction; bad traders exit only after the trade has moved against them.

And yet it is equally true that, if 10% of trades are going to account for the lion’s share of profits, traders must be willing to milk very good trades. This not only means finding the sweet spot where you can “cut your losses and let your profits run”; it also means being willing to trade sufficient size to maximize returns from a good trade. The worst traders I know put on their maximum size when they’re trading at their worst. Typically, they have just lost on one or more trades and now are trying to get the money back. The best traders are able to identify superior trading opportunities—and are patient in waiting for those—and will put size on to take advantage of these. This is how 10 good trades more than make up for 90 scratches and losers.

A favorite trading story that I tell concerns a very successful trader. He promised to tell me the secret of trading success. Of course, my curiosity was piqued and I asked, “What is that?” He responded with a question: “What the ratio of your largest position size to your normal size?” “Three-to-one”, I told him. He smiled. “Consider 20-to-1,” was his advice and his success formula.

I completely believed him. The reason he was successful had nothing to do with finding a better oscillator, regression analysis, or chart formation. He was successful because he had the ability to identify—and wait for—particularly profitable opportunities and then take maximum advantage of those. While 20:1 position sizing is—and will always be—rich for my blood, I think the principle is valid: success is partly a function of putting size on for the logical, not psychological, reasons.

This is one reason trading is so difficult. It is an unusual blending of traits that allows someone to be prudent with risk, scratching trades that don’t move promptly as expected, while at the same time milking opportunity. It is easy to find traders who are risk-averse and stick with their one and five lot positions; it is also easy to find traders who will swing size freely, including times when they are frustrated with the trade. What is rare is to find the mix: the ability to accept and limit the 90% of occasions that don’t work, and yet act aggressively on those 10% of times when there is a move to be exploited.

What is true for size is also true for time. Much can be learned simply by identifying how long a trader has held onto winning vs. losing trades. If a trader is quickly exiting trades that aren’t going in the desired direction, the average holding times for such trades should be quite low. Conversely, with the good traders, it’s not unusual to see a trading log that registers 10% of trades that are held for a lengthy period of time. Invariably, these are the winners that contribute significantly to the overall P/L. The truly unsuccessful traders will also display a minority of trades with long holding times—and these will be the losers. I recently asked a trader why he hung onto a long position for an unusually long period of time. He looked at me somewhat quizzically and replied, “Because I had the bottom!” He was willing to sit through a choppy trade as long as it went in his direction and as long as nothing happened to convince him that he didn’t identify the bottom. That one trade made his entire day.

Perhaps this is a truism in all of life. The people who I have seen who have been very successful in dating and relationships have been willing to go on very many first dates, but not so many second and third ones. They “scratch” the unpromising dates and then focus their energies on the 10% that look worthwhile. The same is often true with respect to career and company success. A successful individual may take on ten projects over the course of a year, but focus efforts on a single initiative when it yields promise. A company may roll out ten products and quickly pull nine, making significant money on the one that finds ready acceptance in the marketplace. Even successful artists and inventors, researcher Dean Keith Simonton found, tend to churn out creative efforts, deriving their fame from the small minority of works that attract the attention of an appreciative world.

Successful traders risk manage their market exposure. Successful individuals risk manage their life exposures. It is not just how much we undertake, but how much we scratch in life that determines our ability to benefit from the episodes of promise that come our way.

How to Take a Loss

There are quite a few books written on how to make money in the market. Some of them are even written by people who have made money as traders! What you don’t see often, however, are books or articles written on how to lose money. “Cut your losers and let your winners run” is commonsensical advice, but how do you determine when a position is a loser? Interestingly, most traders I have seen don’t formulate an answer to this question when they put on a position. They focus on the entry, but then don’t have a clear sense of exit—especially if that exit is going to put them into the red.

One of the real culprits, I have to believe, is in the difficulty traders have in separating the reality of a losing trade from the psychological sense of feeling like a loser. At some level, many traders equate losing with being a loser. This frustrates them, depresses them, makes them anxious—in short, it interferes with their future decision-making, because their P & L is a blank check written against their self-esteem. Once a trader is self-focused and not market focused, distortions in decision-making are inevitable.

A particularly valuable section of the classic book Reminiscences of a Stock Operator describes Livermore’s approach to buying stock. He would sell a quantity and see how the stock responded. Then he would do that again and again, testing the underlying demand for the issue. When his sales could not push the market down, then he would move aggressively to the buy side and make his money.

What I loved about this methodology is that Livermore’s losses were part of a grander plan. He wasn’t just losing money; he was paying for information. If my maximum position size is ten contracts in the ES and I buy the highs of a range with a one-lot, expecting a breakout, I am testing the waters. While I am not potentially moving the market in the way that Livermore might have, I still have begun a test of my breakout hypothesis. I then watch carefully. How are the other averages behaving at the top ends of their range? How is the market absorbing the activity of sellers? Like any good scientist, I am gathering data to determine whether or not my hypothesis is supported.

Suppose the breakout does not materialize and the initial move above the range falls back into the range on some increased selling pressure. I take the loss on my one-lot, but then what happens from there?

The unsuccessful trader will respond with frustration: “Why do I always get caught buying the highs? I can’t believe “they” ran the market against me! This market is impossible to trade.” Because of that frustration—and the associated self-focus—the unsuccessful trader does not take any information away from that trade.

In the Livermore mode, however, the successful trader will see the losing one-lot as part of a greater plan. Had the market broken nicely to the upside, he would have scaled into the long trade and likely made money. If the one-lot was a loser, he paid for the information that this is, at the very least, a range-bound market, and he might try to find a spot to reverse and go short in order to capitalize on a return to the bottom end of that range.

Look at it this way: If you put on a high probability trade and the trade fails to make you money, you have just paid for an important piece of information: The market is not behaving as it normally, historically does. If a robust piece of economic news that normally sends the dollar screaming higher fails to budge the currency and thwarts your purchase, you have just acquired a useful bit of information: There is an underlying lack of demand for dollars. That information might hold far more profit potential than the money lost in the initial trade.

I recently received a copy of an article from Futures Magazine on the retired trader Everett Klipp, who was dubbed the “Babe Ruth of the CBOT”. Klipp distinguished himself not only by his fifty-year track record of trading success on the floor, but also by his mentorship of over 100 traders. Speaking of his system of short-term trading, Klipp observed, “You have to love to lose money and hate to make money to be successful…It’s against human nature what I teach and practice. You have to overcome your humanness.”

Klipp’s system was quick to take profits (hence the idea of hating to make money), but even quicker to take losses (loving to lose money). Instead of viewing losses as a threat, Klipp treated them as an essential part of trading. Taking a small loss reinforces a trader’s sense of discipline and control, he believed. Losses are not failures.

So here’s a question I propose to all those who enter a high-probability trade: “What will tell me that my trade is wrong, and how could I use that information to subsequently profit?” If you’re trading well, there are no losing trades: only trades that make money and trades that give you the information to make money later.