HOME George I Order George I	Performance Updates for George I The following updates are from the period after the system release and as such they present the results that could have been obtained in actual trading. Weekly updates are featured in this article, right at the page bottom and highlighted in yellow. January 2006  +6 pts with 12 trades of which 7 were winners. In one case, the market hit an entry point, but since the price did not penetrate it by at least 1 tick the profit of 0.75 pts from this trade was not taken into account.  I am a trader first and foremost and so I can tell the difference between actual and bogus profits. The whole dream industry has been built around the latter, so if you really need bogus profits you won't have to look really hard for them. February 2006  +2 pts with 9 trades of which 5 were winners. Wow, that was one hell of a photo finish! The last trade on the last day of the month decided the positive outcome for February. Don't tell me that system trading cannot be exciting (errh... nerve wrecking). This last trade barely penetrated the entry (by one tick only) and then the market took off for some 10 pts, about half of which was captured by the system. That should give you an idea how good the system is at pinpointing reversals (or continuations as was the case in the last trade). Another indication how precise it can be at times is the number of trades where the entry is hit, but not penetrated by even one tick. There were 2 trades like that in February that would have contributed 1.75+4.75=6.5 pts to the overall profit, but faithful to my standards I have excluded them. I mention this here so that you can see how easily and how greatly you can improve your system 'hypethetical' performance with such trades, most of which do not add a penny to actual profits. However, some of them can turn into real trades if you place your entry well ahead of the time it is actually hit so that you get a good position in the order queue. You can always do this when you own a system, but when you only follow the system calls generated by a subscription service this might not necessarily be the case. This is one more reason why owning a system can be better than merely subscribing to it. Out of 9 trades this month, 4 reached their assumed target (no slippage at all here), 4 got stopped out (zero to little slippage) and one was exited MOC, so when all was said and done, the system did eke out a small profit for the month. Nothing to write home about though... March 2006  +15.5 pts with 11 trades of which 7 were winners. Good girl, good girl, very good girl! Actually, it's a boy... Would you believe that this bad boy was down almost 11 pts in mid-March and yet finished on a positive side!? The last 6 trades were all winners. That was a very good month as the second half of it was characterized by heavy congestion which is good for a countertrend system like that. Two trades that would have added another 9.5 pts were excluded from the recorded hypothetical profits for the month. Their entry points were touched, but, alas, were not penetrated by at least 1 tick. This month marks the end of the sixth consecutive winning quarter for this system. I did not examine its performance beyond the last six quarters, anyway. April 2006  +11 pts with 13 trades of which 8 were winners. I decided to keep updating this system performance page so that we can see how my Holy Grail system works. Another good month as the market continued to trade mostly in a range. The hypothetical profits would be better by 14.25 pts as three winning trades that failed to penetrate the entry by at least 1 tick have been excluded from the profits reported here. May 2006  +16.75 pts with 14 trades of which 9 were winners. This was the best month for this system so far this year, in part because all entry orders were filled, a pretty unusual situation compared to the previous months of 2006. An increase in volatility, which can be a double-edged sword for a counter-trend system turned out to be beneficial: first in ensuring that all orders were filled and then in helping us reach the targets faster. June 2006  -19.0 pts with 14 trades of which 5 were winners. I expected that the system would take a break as after a few months of a pretty congested market it was the highest time for the market to show some volatility for a change. And show it did. I hate being so right in my expectations, but the good news is that despite the levels of volatility not seen in this market for years, the maximum drawdown remained untouched and the system recorded its seventh profitable quarter in a row. On the whole, not that bad. As in May, all orders would have been filled, which is yet another indication of increased volatility. July 2006  +6.0 pts with 11 trades of which 6 were winners. Well, a moderate recovery is always better than none, particularly that the market continued to be pretty volatile during this month. All trades would have been executed, just as the past two months. August 2006  -5.5 pts with 11 trades of which 5 were winners. Here is the good news: the recent bottom in the equity curve has not been revisited. There were two trades that touched the entry, but did not penetrate it by at least 1 tick. Had I included them in the total tally, the result would have been a perfect breakeven for the month. One of these entries should have definitely been filled (for a 4.75 pts profit), the other one rather not.  September 2006  -18.5 pts with 9 trades of which 3 were winners. This clearly was not a good month. In fact, it was the second worst month in the past 2 years. What's even worse we exceeded the previous maximum drawdown of ca 28 pts by about 9 pts. The 'genuinely' hypothetical results would have been better by 9.5 pts had I added two trades in which the entry was touched only but not penetrated. A relatively small number of trades could also be blamed for this bad month. In a smaller sample it is easier to get an extreme result than in a larger one. October 2006  -24.5 pts with 12 trades of which 3 were winners. This was a very bad month. There was one trade which would have improved the hypothetical results by 4.75 pts, but that's really nothing to write home about.
	Disclaimer: HYPOTHETICAL OR SIMULATED PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE CERTAIN INHERENT LIMITATIONS UNLIKE AN ACTUAL PERFORMANCE RECORD. SIMULATED RESULTS DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL TRADING. ALSO, SINCE THE TRADES HAVE NOT BEEN EXECUTED, THE RESULTS MAY HAVE UNDER OR OVER COMPENSATED FOR THE IMPACT, IF ANY, OF CERTAIN MARKET FACTORS, SUCH AS LACK OF LIQUIDITY. SIMULATED TRADING PROGRAMS IN GENERAL ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO THE FACT THAT THEY ARE DESIGNED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFITS OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN.