Hi guys,
Have a look at some statistics for IB (I started with Jan 08, with Cable). I don't vouch for 100% accuracy (the errors are there as on that chart I couldn't see how each bar was formed), but the general picture is there. Please read the note (2nd sheet) to understand the abbreviations I used.
Although the analysis was done not as a "live" backtesting (that is coming), but as a "hindsight" exercise with a chart, I tried to be as "honest" as possible, considering each IB in its own right.
I considered IBs formed between 0000GMT and noon (GMT). All pre-0600GMT were traded AFTER the 0600GMT bar was formed.
In general, the results are good. Good winners more than compensate the losses. It was important to (a) take some profits as they became available, and (b) let some part of the position run (see the figures in brackets).
However, the reason I am posting this is as follows. As you can see from that statistics, I "traded" some of the IBs again after initial failure. Also, I used "stop-reverse" where applicable ("double-edged IBs). In 1-2 cases, I re-entered three time, i.e. the initial trade was SLed, then I used "stop reverse" to the opposite direction, then I re-entered again in the original direction, was SLed, and re-entered again (in the original direction).
The question is (Jaroo covered "stop-reverse" in some of his posts): should "re-entry" be considered as part of DIBS? The beauty of DIBS is (relatively) is good Risk/Reward ratio, so even after SL is his 2-3 times, the move (when it happens) typically covers the losses.
I guess re-entry could be a bad practice when the market ranges, but when the "big" move is "imminent", should we always consider IB as failed after we were SLed?
I am not suggesting to modify the rules - I am simply sharing some DIBS thoughts which some of you may find of interest for your trading style...
Have a look at some statistics for IB (I started with Jan 08, with Cable). I don't vouch for 100% accuracy (the errors are there as on that chart I couldn't see how each bar was formed), but the general picture is there. Please read the note (2nd sheet) to understand the abbreviations I used.
Although the analysis was done not as a "live" backtesting (that is coming), but as a "hindsight" exercise with a chart, I tried to be as "honest" as possible, considering each IB in its own right.
I considered IBs formed between 0000GMT and noon (GMT). All pre-0600GMT were traded AFTER the 0600GMT bar was formed.
In general, the results are good. Good winners more than compensate the losses. It was important to (a) take some profits as they became available, and (b) let some part of the position run (see the figures in brackets).
However, the reason I am posting this is as follows. As you can see from that statistics, I "traded" some of the IBs again after initial failure. Also, I used "stop-reverse" where applicable ("double-edged IBs). In 1-2 cases, I re-entered three time, i.e. the initial trade was SLed, then I used "stop reverse" to the opposite direction, then I re-entered again in the original direction, was SLed, and re-entered again (in the original direction).
The question is (Jaroo covered "stop-reverse" in some of his posts): should "re-entry" be considered as part of DIBS? The beauty of DIBS is (relatively) is good Risk/Reward ratio, so even after SL is his 2-3 times, the move (when it happens) typically covers the losses.
I guess re-entry could be a bad practice when the market ranges, but when the "big" move is "imminent", should we always consider IB as failed after we were SLed?
I am not suggesting to modify the rules - I am simply sharing some DIBS thoughts which some of you may find of interest for your trading style...
One Chart is Worth Ten Thousand Words.
