Sep
28
Comments on COT, from Anatoly Veltman
September 28, 2008 |
1/ Gold: our suspicions, based on decline in Open Interest, proved right. The jump $780 -> $891 was entirely on Spec short-covering, while Commercials liquidated longs. This is not the hallmark of flight-to-safety circa '79-'80. On the other side of the coin, Silver commitments relatively improved: Commercials unexpectedly covered some shorts during the jump $10.52 -> $13.17, while Specs covered some longs. Open interest gains in Platinum Group Metals (PGM) proved not of bullish make-up: Commercials duly shorted the rally. Note: both PGMs already slid nearly 10% in three days since the report!
2/ Nov Crude $15 mark-up occured, as Large Spec short-covered Oct Crude! Small Specs went Net new Short into Novee rally — making us much friendlier! Moreover, bullish C.O.T. divergence is uncovered in RBOB: Commercials became 10% more Net Long in course of 10% price rally! NG commitments improved a bit further: Large Specs notched yet another Short Open Interest record, while sentiment is bordering dramatically over-sold!
3/ CD and BP 4% rally didn't trigger Commercial selling; thus, we can expect more rally! Not as bullish in EU, SF, JY, AD.
4/ SP futures quarterly rollover showed plenty of Commercial short-covering, while Small Specs assumed new shorts — a recipe for a dramatic short-covering rally!
5/ Treasuries display dramatic Open Interest drop-off, a sign that little quality is perceived in traditional "flight-to-quality." Of note: the only willing shorts at the short-end remain Commercials; while Specs are bearish long-dated!
Comments
12 Comments so far
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- Older Archives
Resources & Links
- The Letters Prize
- Pre-2007 Victor Niederhoffer Posts
- Vic’s NYC Junto
- Reading List
- Programming in 60 Seconds
- The Objectivist Center
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Tigerchess
- Dick Sears' G.T. Index
- Pre-2007 Daily Speculations
- Laurel & Vics' Worldly Investor Articles
I'm curious, what makes you "expect" any of these moves based on COT data? Have you tested any of these theories at all?
Anatoly, on point 4/ I don't follow you.
I see what you are saying for the week before last, but for the week of 23 Sep, my COT for the S&P500 shows:
Commercials -23,067 change (more short)
Large Specs +18,114 (more long)
Small Specs +4953 (more long).
The commercials haven't been this short since before March of last year.
Too me it looks like a surge in commercial hedging while specs are short-covering / going long.
What am I missing? Cheers,
George
the boy: you've missed a year worth of discussion. Short re-cap:
1. COT should never be used as primary - thus, what are you going to test?
2. Usefulness of COT data is limited to "stretched out" market situations, extended moves, margin stress.
3. Ideas that I derive from COT are not necessarily trading signals; they certainly don't put you into a Long or Short in every market. You just get tipped-off to avoid the wrong side of a potential outlier.
1. COT should never be used as primary - thus, what are you going to test?
2. Usefulness of COT data is limited to “stretched out” market situations, extended moves, margin stress.
Undefined words and untestable theories hmmm…
Mr T and "the boy" — I've derided Anatoly many times on exactly your points, yet he clings to this untestable jabbowocky. Here's something that is testable: A linear scale purchase of S&P500 futures beginning below the 2.7 sigma of the weekly Bollinger Band has been 100% profitable over the last 30 years… including the 1987 stock market crash. Depending on your chart's roll date, the 2.7 sigma comes is now at 1084. Lock and load, gentlemen.
Exactly, Mr T. I have tested COT extensively. It's data; of course it can be tested.
Mr T, You missed a year 's worth of explanations, too. Read over all past COT comments and you'll have plenty of definitions to chew on. As to testability, my present opinion: not feasable. Who'll finance proper testing? Remember: you need expert input, not just a quant who has no idea what he's testing.
Who will finance it? Good question; after all it's not like your system would be profitable… You're quite the internet sensation A.V. I look forward to the inevitable OSOK book pimping on Daily Spec…
Mr T, Not an interesting subject (you picked) to look forward to. What I look forward to is competent commentary on the subject matter. At least George Parkanyi tried (but forgot about E-minis' existence).
dear all,
i duly follow the cot report on a weekly basis not as a trading tool but as the nth detail of the big picture. as a speculator i need to be open-minded and observe all available data and most of the times i even don't bother to check if there's any statistical significance because of the human beings limited rationality and time-limitations.
anyway, i don't know if it helps but i think u guys r rationalizing too much.
i mean that the current situation is a crisis situation and as such i has to be treated differently. by differently i mean to get rid of all the tools, indicators, opinions etc that helped u in the past and just trade with very low size and if uncertain, just stay flat. i always say my bankroll is more important than my ego or fancy indicators or past correlations that r statistically significant. the only thing with significant importance should be my positive p&l at the end of the day and healthy sleepy nights.
i'm very happy to leave the stress of debating whats right or wrong to the others. money-making is already a very boring, painful and time-consuming activity.
thanx all and in particular to my mentors vic and laurel.
lv
Luigi, thanx for a couple of useful thoughts. e.g. "current situation is a crisis situation and as such it has to be treated differently" Black-boxes should be having somewhat of rough time - as many current events are unprecedented. That's why a well-equipped discretionary trader derives advantage over the mechanical funds, and stands fair chance to take their money via appropriate use of tools such as retracements, MA's, chart patterns, inter-market causal/sequenced relationships, Open Interest, C.O.T., etc. Those who claim having tested all of these tools in "every way possible" emulate a weekend-soccerplayer claiming that 11-meter kick is impossible to score - because they couldn't put it past the national-team goalie in series of dozen attempts…
You have definately read one too many trading for a living books