top | item 40468991

(no title)

flourpower471 | 1 year ago

Not to mention, as somebody who works in quant trading doing ml all day on this kind of data. That ann benchmark is nowhere near state of the art.

People didn't stop working on this in 1989 - they realised they can make lots of money doing it and do it privately.

discuss

order

benreesman|1 year ago

I never traded consistently and successfully but I did do a startup with a seasoned quant trader with the ambition of using bigger models to generate novel alpha. We mopped the floor with the academics who publish but that is whiffle ball compared to a real prop outfit that lasts.

Not having made it big myself I obviously don’t know the meta these days, but last I had any inside baseball, the non-stationarity and friction just kill you on trying to get fancy as opposed to just nailing it on the fundamentals.

Extreme execution quality is a game, people make money in both traditional liquidity provision and agency execution by being fast as hell and managing risk well.

Individual signals that are individually somewhat mundane but composed well via straightforward linear-ish regressions is a game: people get (ever decaying) alpha out of bright ideas (and rotate new signals in).

And I’m sure that LLMs have started playing a role, there’s a legitimate capability increase in spite of the dubious production-worthiness.

But as a blind wager, I bet prop trading is about what it was 5 years ago on better gear: elite execution (no pun intended) on known-good ways to generate alpha.

arathis|1 year ago

I think I understood 7 words you just said mister

bossyTeacher|1 year ago

>People didn't stop working on this in 1989 - they realised they can make lots of money doing it and do it privately.

Mind elaborating?

SavageBeast|1 year ago

Speaking for myself and likely others with similar motivations, yes we can "figure it out" and publish something to show our work and expand the field of endeavor with our findings - OR - we can figure something profitable out on our own and use our own funds to trade our strategies with our own accounts.

Anyone who has figured out something relatively profitable isn't telling anyone how they did it.

Fomite|1 year ago

At a SciPy meeting where someone in finance was presenting an intro on some tools, someone asked if they ever contribute code to those open source projects. Their answer was "Yes, but only after we've stopped making money with them."

dpflan|1 year ago

Seems simple: Why share your effective strategies in an industry full of competition and those striving to gain a competitive edge?

melenaboija|1 year ago

> Mind elaborating?

I am assuming, he/she minds a lot.

bethekind|1 year ago

Do you use llama 3 for your work?

posting_mess|1 year ago

No hedge fund registered before the last 2 weeks will use Llama3 for their "prod work" beyond "experiments".

Quant trading is about "going fast" or "being super right", so either you'd need to be sitting on some huge llama.cpp/transformer improvement (possible but unlikely) or its more likely just some boring math applied faster than others.

Even if they are using a "LLM", they wont tell you or even hint at it - "efficient market" n all that.

Remember all quants need to be "the smartest in the world" or their whole industry falls apart, wait till you find out its all "high school math" based on algo's largely derived 30/40 years ago (okay not as true for "quants" but most "trading" isn't as complex as they'd like you/us to believe).