A combination of A and B makes sense to me.. my aim is to create a heap of UNCORRELATED strategies that have good returns and very minimal draw down. Stagnation doesn’t worry me as much (but I try to reduce it) because no strategy will make money ALL the time, so if they are holding their own in the bad times that’s good enough for me.
As nolube mentions, the key term here is correlation.
Here is a definition of the Correlation Coefficient:
A measure that determines the degree to which two variable’s movements are associated.
If two Forex pairs have inverse Correlation Coefficients e.g. EUR/USD and USD/CHF
or the same then it wouldn’t make much sense to have differing strategies for each of these pairs.
Whereas the pairs EUR/USD and AUD/USD would have differing Correlation Coefficients
and so should have differing strategies, in my opinion.
A good article on the subject is here:
Using Currency Correlations To Your Advantage
Another important consideration is a pairs Standard Deviation or
measure of its historical volatility.
Even if two pairs do correlate their Standard Deviation may be radically
different and thus require completely differing trading strategies.
In my opinion making one strategy that work well on different pairs would have sense. It would be a proof of the concept used in this strategy. Even if EURUSD have his own historic volatility, it wouldn’t be the same in a near of far future. So, if a strategy work well on many different pairs, it has the power of “ruling” the market, in any condition.
Of course, it wouldn’t have to be perfect, but with a good profitability.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.