Message-ID: <21629920.1075842075224.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 00:46:00 -0800 (PST) From: greg.whalley@enron.com To: zimin.lu@enron.com Subject: RE: EOL WTI Historical Trade Simulation - more profitable trading strategy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Greg Whalley X-To: Zimin Lu, "Greg" X-cc: "Vince J" X-bcc: X-Folder: \Lawrence_Whalley_Nov2001\Notes Folders\Sent X-Origin: WHALLEY-G X-FileName: gwhalley.nsf Volume won't affect relative profitability. It just scales the profit or loss. Increasing the number of transactions always results in more profit. Increasing volume just makes the numbers bigger. ----Original Message----- >From: Zimin Lu/HOU/ECT >To: Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT,John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron >Cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT,Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT >Bcc: >Subj: EOL WTI Historical Trade Simulation - more profitable trading strategy >Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 3:45 AM > >Please ignor my previous mail regarding the same issue, which contains some typos. > > > >Greg and John, > >I found that by reducing the volume per trade and increasing daily number of trades ( keeping the >total volume per day constant), we can be more profitable. This is partially because in a trending market >we lose less money by following the market more closely. For example, suppose market move from >$30 to $35. If per trade volume is 10,000 BBL and the half bid-offer spread is $1 for simplicity, we take 5 > trades of short positions, the total MTM for that day is (-5-4-3-2-1)*10,000=-$150,000 and total trading >volume is 50,000 BBL short. If per trade volume is 50,000 BBL, we take one trade, the total MTM is >-5*50,000= -$250,000. Thus the net difference between the two trading strategies is $10,000 for that >particular day. > >Therefore it seems that by reducing per trade volume and increasing the number of trades, we can be more >profitable as a market maker. > >I rerun a scenario that > >