Care sharing how you came to that conclusion? We've been completely transparent about everything we've built since the start. And our trades are transparent as well.
This is simple economics. As someone else stated, if this worked at all, you would have poured all of your resources into investing your own money or starting a fund to manage others' money. If you could beat the market by just 5%, you would be a billionaire within a very short amount of time as everyone would bring you their money. Instead, you decided to build a website and sell it to others for $20 per month. Surely as someone so knowledgeable in markets, you realize that selling something so valuable for so little would not happen.
I stand by my statement - your product is false hope and is a scam, as all of these systems are. Some sucker who doesn't understand that the best move is to just buy the broad market an hold reads your marketing, buys it, and pays you. What you've sold him is certainly not the ability to make more money. You and I know he won't do that unless by pure luck. What you've sold him is a sense of hope that he will make money, and the ones who often fall for this do so because they've gotten themselves into financial problems with trading and want to believe that this is the system that will fix it all for them. That hope is a very addictive drug that will last as long as he can hold on to the lie.
If you're ok with that being your business model, that's your right. It isn't illegal. In my opinion, however, our society is completely overloaded with people who take advantage of others while adding zero value.
Anything that is related to HFT or day trading is almost impossible in my experience as well. The big funds can do it but I dont think retail has a chance with these approaches.
Have you researched trend or stage analysis? They're slower strategies and dont offer the get rich quick hype, but they do have far better success when done well.
Yeah, I think all arbitrage setups of any kind are already being exploited by those with a hard to replicate edge (nano second execution/latency, very very deep pockets - typically your large market makers like Citadel). Just think about it: Jim Simons (RIP) had been doing it for longer than most of us have been alive.
Pretty soon AI won’t be optional, it’ll be the only way to run a profitable quant shop.
This is typically true for day trading signal services. I'm very skeptical of them too. I've tried many of them and none worked for me. There are a lot of scams.
The best model I tried was from The Technical Traders. They offer a trend based model for SPX/QQQ and they consistently outperform buy and hold for 10+ years now.
We were inspired by their service and wanted to take a modern spin on trend based models with a more affordable price point (they charge $2500yr).
Trend changes don't happen all that frequently. Therefore, they wont disappear immediately either. Timing trend changes correctly can make a huge difference.
It would be trivially easy to build an algo that beats the market 90% of years but 10% has huge losses. Just construct a slightly levered portfolio, with some protection against minor losses, but totally exposed to big losses.
If you sold that, it would appear like its working for awhile and you'd probably have lots of trusted customers by the time it fails.
(I'm a bit cynical, I worked in finance briefly, and I realized the fund we were selling to investors was essentially this)
> The best model I tried was from The Technical Traders. They offer a trend based model for SPX/QQQ and they consistently outperform buy and hold for 10+ years now.
- Has that been independently verified?
- Have they only been trading for 10 years?
- How do we make sure this isn't a case of chance + survivorship bias?
Not sure, but I personally used their service for 2y and they're the real deal. Looks like they've been around since 2008. So almost 20y now. The main guy that runs it (Chris V) is top notch. I'm not affiliate with them in anyway but I would highly recommend their service to anyone.
- From where, then, did you get the info that "they consistently outperform buy and hold for 10+ years now"?
- What does "they're the real deal" mean?
- Two years is not enough to test a strategy like this. 20 years would be better better, but it sounds like they already did that and the strategy fails half the time (hence the 10-year claim)? Does it fail randomly, or did they market a strategy that worked for the first 10 years, then didn't, and now have a new strategy with the same claims?
I'm asking these questions because people usually work hard for their money, and when someone makes (or relays) a claim that they can consistently multiply it better than expected, skepticism and scrutiny is imperative.
I don't know everything about their business. I recommend just looking at their website. They've been in business for nearly 20y and have consistently outperformed buy & hold.
Nobody explicitly said it was a scam, just that the claims are questionable and unverified. There's certainly no shortage of people on the internet who claim to have a get-rich-quicker-than-average scheme with claims exactly along these lines. Obviously those claims should be verified.
> I recommend just looking at their website.
A random website can't be trusted as an unbiased source about itself. I did check their website, but couldn't find anything there regarding your claims that was independently verified.
My claim is that The Technical Trades (TTT) was the only service that worked for me. I stand by that. And I have no affiliation with TTT. Beyond that, please contact Chris if you want more detailed proof of their track record.
Because TrendFi is a trend based model, the signals are not for HFT or day trading. Instead, we identify major market shifts that play out over weeks or months. This long timeframe means the signals are less vulnerable to the immediate front running or spread manipulation that plagues short-term signals.
Also, the AI's ability to self optimize after trades means the underlying parameters are not static. If external players were to try and consistently game the signals, the system is designed to adapt to those new dynamics.
Most trading signals aim to exploit a secret edge. A temporary market inefficiency. The value is in the secret itself. Once you sell the secret, the small window of opportunity is competed away almost instantly.
Trend based models are different. The "secret" isn't a secret at all. Think of a trend based trading strategy more as a disciplined methodology. Trend based models follow price and attempt to identify as early as possible when an asset flips from bearish to bullish.
Therefore, selling our model wont destroy the underlying trend, especially in highly liquid assets, such as: SPX, BTC, etc.
This doesn't make as much sense as you think it does. If you could predictably trade a flip from bearish to bullish (for example, of course there are other trend-based signals), you would not share that signal because others would overcrowd your trade (by buying/shorting and moving the price more quickly towards the trending direction than you).
A potential argument is that these signals are only applicable to a certain bracket of portfolio sizes (e.g. larger AUM funds would not be able to trade this strategy) -- but you are sharing this with folks presumably in your range of portfolio size.
The more highly liquid an asset, the more efficient it is and the fewer trading opportunities after accounting for transaction costs. In something like the S&P 500, everything is already priced in.
Meme stocks and shitcoins being manipulated by whales are not efficient and also not as liquid.
The larger point remains that none of the above considerations are discussed on this product's page.
I'm realizing there's a lot of confusion about what trend based models actually are. I was under the assumption the concept was more widely understood, but I'm realizing we need to explain it better.
To be clear, there's nothing new or innovative about a trend based model. It's one of the most commonly used investment strategies by intuitions, etc. It's been widely utilized for far longer than I've been alive.
There's no confusion about the type of edge. Just pointing out that if you are selling an edge rather than trading it yourself, you're either grifting or naive.
Agreed, definitely some pros to using LLMs in email vs chat. Feels pretty natural to send an email and get a response shortly after with a notification, etc.
