# Nat’s ‘inflection point’ calls – 2019 results

### Update 1: March 31, 2019

#### Results for March, 2019

Total net gain for month: \$2,227.50
Number of winners: 11
Value of winners: \$6,220
Number of losers: 15
Value of losers: -\$3,992.50
Average winner: \$565.45; average loser: -\$266.17
Longest winning streak: 4 trades; value \$2385
Longest losing streak: 4 trades; value \$1090

#### Year to Mar. 31:

Total net value: \$9,795
Number of winners: 39
Value of winners: \$23,357.50
Number of losers: 48
Value of losers: -\$13,562.50
Average winner: \$598.91; average loser: \$282.55
Longest winning streak: 4 trades; value \$2385
Longest losing streak: 4 trades; value \$1090

### What’s the best way to trade them?

For some time we’ve been posting selected examples of trades based on Nat’s inflection points. (Here’s an example of the Inflection points; here is an example of the selected calls).

We often get lots of questions about the overall results of these calls, and about how to use them. So we ran a number of simulations comparing the inflection points to the actual market price action for the first two months of 2019. Here’s what we found.

• In the first two three months of 2019 Nat’s inflection point calls returned a net gain of \$7,567.50 \$9,795 trading one contract per call.
• There is a simple, relatively safe and consistent method of trading them which is available now at no additional charge to every member with Daily Access or above.
• Using that method Oil trades returned \$6980 per contract over the two three months of the study; ES trades returned \$1575; gold trades returned \$1,240.
• 276 366 orders were entered (two for each of three contracts for each of 46 61 trading days) of which 61 87 were filled and resulted in trades; 28 39 winners and 33 48 losers.
• After the first two days the cumulative profit/loss was positive and stayed positive for the entire period, with the exception of a single day; after the second week of January the simulation was never under water.

We will be posting the full results as well as a spreadsheet of the data collected, so you can do your own analysis. You may find an even more profitable way to trade Nat’s inflection points. Stay tuned.

• Enter a buy and a sell order overnight for each of the three contracts covered in the Naturus daily worksheet: oil futures, gold futures and the e-minis (i.e. a total of six orders each trading day).
• All orders are good “day-only” — automatically cancelled at the close of the day session.
• Place a hard stop on every order: \$300 for gold and the ES, \$400 for oil.
• If an order is filled, cancel the opposite order, i.e. order-cancels-order.
• If an order is filled, and not stopped out, cover it market-on-close.

All of these actions can be accomplished with limit orders placed in the evening (Eastern time) after the markets are closed and the daily workbook is published.

There is no need to watch the market after the orders are placed, and because the orders are  good “day only” they qualify for (much lower) day — instead of overnight — margins

The entire process should require no more than an hour a day in the evening to place orders and record the results.

#### Managing risk

This is a mechanical, systematic method of trading, and limiting losses is automatic … as long as you faithfully follow the system.

Barring slippage, the maximum daily loss is three orders filled and all three stopped out on the same day. The maximum loss for a day like that would be \$1000 — gold and the ES stopped out for a loss of \$300 each and oil stopped out for a loss of \$400. That occurred once in the 46 days in this study.

The second and third largest daily losses would be \$700 or \$600 — two orders filled and both stopped out, with no offsetting winners.  That happened twice in the 46 days in this study.

In total, of the 46 days in the study, there were net losses on 14 days. The longest losing streak was three days, for a total loss of \$503.50.

#### Stops

We experimented with different stops, both larger and smaller.

Tighter stops decreased the max loss per trade, but increased the number of times the trades were stopped out, and missed some highly profitable trades. Larger stops did not seem to catch more trades, but increased the total amount of losses.

We settled on stops of \$300 for gold and the ES, \$400 for oil. This level gave the best result for us, but Your Mileage May Vary.

### The results

#### Table: Weekly results, First Quarter, 2019

WinnersNum.LosersNum.NetTotal
JanuaryWeek 1\$940.002\$770.002\$170.004
Week 2\$1,040.001\$700.003\$340.004
Week 3\$752.503\$1,600.005\$-847.508
Week 4\$1,735.002\$600.003\$1,135.005
Week 5\$3,090.005\$1,025.004\$2,065.009
Februaryweek1\$1,875.003\$800.003\$1,075.006
week2\$3,930.006\$1,000.003\$2,930.009
week3\$1,000.003\$1,300.004\$-300.007
week4\$2,775.003\$1,775.006\$1,000.009
Marchweek1\$460.001\$700.002\$-240.003
week2\$780.002\$1,400.006\$-620.008
week3\$2,095.002\$892.504\$1,202.506
week4\$2,885.006\$1,000.003\$1,885.009
Total\$23,357.5039\$13,562.5048\$9,795.0087
Average\$598.91\$-282.55

### Comparing results across different contracts.

In Q1 2019 trades on oil contracts were far better than the other two combined and accounted for most of the profit. Trades on the e-mini futures and gold showed only a modest profit. Compare the following charts.

#### Profit/Loss results by contract

Cumulative results for E-minis, Oil, Gold and all three combined for the first quarter of 2019. Each bar represents one day and shows the cumulative p/l including that day. Each group of bars represents the daily results for one week. Click charts to enlarge.

In view of the vastly superior results from the oil trades, we separated out the results if only the oil calls were traded. Here’s what we got.

Oil Trades - Q1, 2019Total ValueNumberAverage Value
Winners\$19,190.0017\$718.24
Losers\$5,230.0015-\$348.67
Net/Total\$6,980.0032\$218.13
Consecutive winners4Value:Total: \$2660
Consecutive losers3Value:Total: \$1200

In summary, there were roughly as many winners as losers, but the winners were roughly twice as large. The cumulative profit/loss for oil trades turned positive after the first two days, and stayed positive for the entire 13 weeks.

Those results make it worthwhile to consider trading only the oil calls: one-third of the risk, one-third of the effort, and almost as much profit.

However markets run in streaks, and the relative profitability of different contracts can easily change. The daily range of oil during the time period was higher than for the other contracts and that affects the results; the more it moves the greater the opportunity.

### To be continued

We will continue to update these results with current trades every month. If you would like a copy of the raw data to run your own analysis, please send a note to admin@naturus.com. Here is the spreadsheet used to draw the charts and the associated data (automatic download in xls format).