苹果BLUE

The Apple point $RDNT has been received; it is a range with a 60% probability of reversing from here, at least a small reversal, the last dance before cutting leeks...

The high point breakthrough of the big bearish line $AXL can re-enter the market, and I will fully implement the Kelly formula from now on.

On April 1st, it will be removed, so the top space public single炒冷饭抄底逃顶认准苹果指标, as long as I want to top space and pin it, I can change it once every three days or so. I can maintain the top space for two or three days and change it once, but the blogger has his own things to do. Although this indeed can quickly generate traffic, I calculated that if I break through 10,000 followers, I need to top space 300 times. Extreme professional ability.

Recently, I learned about the Kelly Criterion through study, so often I have to look beyond technical analysis to find solutions.
The Kelly Criterion is a method for managing bet sizing, where the bet size is high when the mathematical expectation is good or the edge is significant, and smaller when the expectation is slightly less favorable.
Applying the Kelly Criterion in conjunction with mathematical expectation is the wedge trading model I aim to adopt in the future.
Many quantitative investment institutions use the Kelly Criterion; when the mathematical edge is large, the bet size is high, and when the mathematical edge is small, the bet size is low. My past management method was to use a uniform position for all trades, which led to a poor performance curve. In the last 7 days of February, I lost all profits from January to February back to the starting point, and it was also at this time that I learned more things. Although I lost money, this wave was actually not a loss...
This wave mainly optimized position management, and then re-executed. The first phase goal is to break even.

The Kelly Criterion and Its Application Methods
The Kelly Criterion is a mathematical formula used to determine the optimal proportion of funds to bet in investments or gambling to maximize long-term wealth growth. The formula is: f* = (bp - q) / b, where f* is the optimal betting proportion, b is the odds (the ratio of profit to principal), p is the win rate, and q is the loss rate (i.e., 1-p).

Application Method: First, evaluate the win rate p and the odds b, then substitute into the formula to calculate f. For example, if the win rate is 60% and the odds are 1:1 (i.e., b=1), then f = (1*0.6 - 0.4) / 1 = 0.2, suggesting a bet of 20% of the funds. In practice, caution is needed, considering risk tolerance, market volatility, and model assumptions to avoid over-betting.
I found that during my trading process, my betting proportion was always the same, and then I noticed some issues: for some wedges, the win rate might be close to 40% rather than exactly 40%, and some had very small K-line volumes at entry, so their win rates were also quite low. In such cases, I would use the minimum betting proportion, only increasing it when encountering a perfect upward sloping wedge shape.
So this has also been a recent learning for me. The Kelly Criterion has been praised by Charlie Munger and many leaders in quantitative funds, so from today on, I will officially incorporate the Kelly Criterion into my trading system.
Then, summarize the reasons for each trade's failure and success, summarize successful trades, summarize failed trades, and adjust the betting proportion based on the practical results of the market.

The wedge trading in the last 7 days of the month was a complete mess, and when I went to summarize the reasons myself, I found it impossible to summarize because I had not categorized my previous losing and winning trades for analysis. From now on, for every wedge trade, I will put the profitable trades on one side and the losing trades on the other for easier review. This is one of the top ten best trading methods, and it's quite difficult, uh.
The yield this month is very poor, so poor that it’s hard to look at. I see that some bloggers are simply amazing, but I don't believe those winning rate myths; the market's expectations are balanced, and there are no gods.
I still have some doubts now about whether the double bottom reversal wedge reversal with a 2:1 risk-reward ratio actually has a 40% winning rate. All my data, regardless of what others tell me about how to do this or that to achieve stable profits, I have to try it all myself. So after three years, I feel that my trial-and-error cost is quite high, with several hundred thousand in trial-and-error costs, which is the truth. As I learn more, I am no longer a trading novice. Most stable profit traders basically lose money in the first 10 years. Everything needs to be explored by oneself; I do not believe in any myths of this market.
I also do not believe in any myths created by any bloggers. If you can make money in trading by trusting someone, believing in a certain blogger, and then making money, that is a huge mistake. Trading requires introspection, seeking oneself, not relying on others. A trading system needs to have mathematical expectations. If this wedge system fails, I might take a few months to settle down and then try other systems.
The difficulty for ordinary traders to achieve stable profits is unimaginably high. The stable profits achieved in this market every year and every month are not made by traditional investors, not by value investors, but by quantitative investment. The most famous is Simmons' Renaissance Technologies with a 66% annual return on its Medallion Fund. Going even further back, Edward Thorp utilized slight mathematical advantages and the Kelly formula to achieve stable profits every year, every month, and every quarter in the last century, even in today's AI era. The strategies of these quantitative institutions will iterate at an unprecedented speed, and ordinary traders in the market have almost no foothold. Starting today, I will also use the Kelly formula for trading.

Interact more with people who make money and serve those who earn. Li Ka-shing doesn't take the last penny from the poor; making a small amount from the wealthy is much easier than earning the last penny from the poor. In the future, the prices for my mainstream coin bottom-fishing services will increase significantly. Simply put, it's about creating distance. Taking money from the poor leads to internal consumption, or it may bring you internal consumption. If you take money from the poor, you're just harvesting leeks, so I'd rather have no one buy my services than lower the price. I'd rather not open for business for three to five years than serve low-value people, as they will keep asking for more, while high-value individuals will reciprocate.
The first point is that my services can indeed match adequate prices. The second point is that my services only provide indicators that are genuinely verified from the market, and I do not offer anything else or market judgments. I only tell you the entry and exit indicators for trend investing and quantitative investing.
What I sell are indicators and cost-effectiveness, nothing more. The indicators I provide will increase the probability of accurately bottom-fishing and escaping the top. I have publicly demonstrated this countless times, so I will not elaborate further.
There is no 100% certainty. What I sell is probability and cost-effectiveness, not specific points. Don’t think that I’m selling specific points; I am absolutely not selling points this simply.
My services target individuals with substantial funds who are ready to buy spot and can hold long-term. If I try to serve everyone, I would exhaust myself; I would rather not take orders.
Even if the blogger starts charging, they won’t exploit you small leeks.
So, choosing to raise prices is a very good approach.
Now I understand very well and highly appreciate that payment is the greatest recognition; everything else is nonsense.

$AXL Here is also a good wedge trading opportunity. I placed a buy order at 0.04799. If the price breaks through this high point again, I will have the chance to achieve a two-to-one profit-loss ratio with a 40% probability.
From now on, I will completely standardize my entry and exit points, and I will set a rule for myself that I must have a mathematical expectation of 0.2 to enter the market.
Today I made a current trade, still found by AI. I entered at the time and then got a bit anxious. I opened a position without a good mathematical expectation. Damn it, a 1.3 times profit-loss ratio with a 40% win rate, the mathematical expectation is directly negative.
I still need to standardize my operations and look for trading opportunities myself. After communicating with AI for half a day, it's like talking to an artificial idiot. Maybe my prompts are not clear enough.
One is to reduce mistakes, and the second is that I will no longer use the AI from B安 at this stage. It's an artificial idiot; when I ask, it gives random answers.

$SIREN 3 March 28th 10:02 AM Send this coin's Apple index 5.03700 short in advance n days~ The probability is currently less than 40%, with no support or resistance, make a preliminary judgment~ Bottom-fishing and top-selling rely on the Apple index

As long as I am still doing it, this model has a chance to achieve stable profits. The day I stop doing it will mean that this path is wasted, you understand, it means my curve is poorly executed. And as for the leading part, regardless of how well it is done, this indeed involves quantitative trading, and they can achieve stable profits. Their entry and exit strategies are quite similar to mine, including the charts I share with everyone, which demonstrate that after achieving a two-to-one profit-loss ratio, there will be a reversal. This all proves that quantitative trading is at work. Anyway, I adhere to a relatively open principle in this regard. I haven't even made 100 trades with wedges yet, so my experiences and lessons, as well as how to find wedges when opening positions, will all be shared publicly for free. No matter whether I achieve stable profits in the future, I will share my path to stable profitability. I still need to do it for a few more months or maybe half a year to see how the overall curve looks. The main issue is that no one is willing to learn; everyone is more focused on high win-rate strategies. There's nothing I can do about that. You can also ask AI if a 33.33% win rate with a two-to-one profit-loss ratio can break even. I've calculated these things carefully, but this month has indeed been very poor, especially in these last days, it's not just bad. This includes some problems I've encountered while doing wedges.
Now, I'm trying to find ways to make fewer mistakes and improve the win rate a bit.

Next month, I aim to achieve a wedge-shaped actual win rate of 37%~ I reached this win rate back in February, and this month, I must say, it's quite poor; today I see it's at 30%. However, the four positions I hold are still profitable and haven't been closed. I've been quite unlucky. If the wedge shape can't achieve stable profits, over time, I won't update naturally~ There is still a chance for stable profits.

$BEAT Looking for trading opportunities, another wedge with a 2:1 risk-reward ratio chance of 40%, and at this price on the daily chart, it just happens to be the eema20 support. If you've opened a wedge before, you can continue to open now, give me some trust, okay?~ This position also has a 50% chance to reverse upwards after the wedge fails, and there is a 40% chance here to achieve a 2:1 risk-reward ratio.

$UB The wedge trading in the last few days of this month has been quite poor, or let's say the luck has been rather bad. Let's take a look at this trade, I'm determined to continue~ This trade is after the wedge failure, and there is a reversal candlestick again, which is the 50% probability I mentioned before. After the wedge failure, there will be another reversal, and this time there is also a 40% probability of achieving a twofold profit-loss ratio. Moreover, the entry candlestick at this position is relatively good, with a range of about ten percent. It's quite good, better than the previous short trade with a 30% range, which incurred losses that will take several winning trades to recover.

$ON tested Binance AI a bit, it feels somewhat like an artificial intelligence fool... there is still a significant gap compared to large models like Q&A.

If this one-hour candlestick $ON forms a good bullish line, it can be treated as a wedge entry, and then aim for a two-to-one risk-reward ratio like this.

$ON opened a bit late, ai help me find trading opportunities. on can go long now as the bulls have positive expected value.

$ON Today is different, starting today I will use AI to assist me in finding trading opportunities. It used to take me half an hour each time to find them. Binance AI is so useful, I love you, it directly helped me find a perfect wedge.

Today I used Binance's AI to help me directly screen targets, it saved me a lot of time, damn. He said it can only be done for 15 minutes, during this time I should trade for 15 minutes, there should be quite a few opportunities.

The Apple pencil index just measured at $Q , this market has already finished. I measured it out of boredom to see what it was about. The red horizontal line is... If this market were to rise slowly, I could even take a short position~