Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Citadel Senior Quant Developer just dropped the complete math framework for scaling a pairs trading desk to 200+ concurrent market positions. 54-minutes. free. By Quant Trader. here's what they cover: • integration orders (I(0) vs I(1)) for asset pricing • using the Augmented Dickey-Fuller test over standard graphs •... show more

venus

3,354 subscribers

29,843 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

MIT Professor just revealed the exact mathematical framework behind quant trading and zero-sum edge. 80-minutes. free. By Ian Bell. here's what they cover: • how von Neumann proved moving first isn't a disadvantage in zero-sum games • Nash equilibrium vs. security strategies (minimax & maximin algebra) • why chess has an exact objective outcome (1, -1, or 0) • von Neumann poker model - proving bluffing as pure math Bookmark & watch today. Then read the article below.

MIT Professor just revealed the exact mathematical framework behind quant trading and zero-sum edge. 80-minutes. free. By Ian Bell. here's what they cover: • how von Neumann proved moving first isn't a disadvantage in zero-sum games • Nash equilibrium vs. security strategies (minimax & maximin algebra) • why chess has an exact objective outcome (1, -1, or 0) • von Neumann poker model - proving bluffing as pure math Bookmark & watch today. Then read the article below.

venus

13,161 views • 1 month ago

AI Phd Professor just showed how to build Hidden Markov Models for time-series data. 61-minutes. free. By AI Researcher for Quants. "for stock market prediction is the same idea you want to predict what prices are going to be in the future" here's what they cover: •why the independent data assumption fails •calculating transition and emission distributions •predicting future states step-by-step •extracting hidden sequences with the Viterbi algorithm Bookmark it & watch today. Then read the article below.

AI Phd Professor just showed how to build Hidden Markov Models for time-series data. 61-minutes. free. By AI Researcher for Quants. "for stock market prediction is the same idea you want to predict what prices are going to be in the future" here's what they cover: •why the independent data assumption fails •calculating transition and emission distributions •predicting future states step-by-step •extracting hidden sequences with the Viterbi algorithm Bookmark it & watch today. Then read the article below.

venus

43,465 views • 2 months ago

Citadel and Jane Street pay quants $62K/month to weaponize order book microstructure. MIT's Dr. Jake Xia just dropped a masterclass breaking down how institutional desks structure risk. 35-minutes. free. By former Morgan Stanley Head Quant. here's the structural logic: • why market makers prioritize flattening out positions over taking directional risk • how macro risk shifts when interest rate curves become inverted • structural execution differences between over-the-counter (OTC) agreements and ECNs • the 3 core divisions of capital routing that drive institutional desks worth more than any $500 vibe-coding course. Bookmark it & watch today. Then read the breakdown article below.

Citadel and Jane Street pay quants $62K/month to weaponize order book microstructure. MIT's Dr. Jake Xia just dropped a masterclass breaking down how institutional desks structure risk. 35-minutes. free. By former Morgan Stanley Head Quant. here's the structural logic: • why market makers prioritize flattening out positions over taking directional risk • how macro risk shifts when interest rate curves become inverted • structural execution differences between over-the-counter (OTC) agreements and ECNs • the 3 core divisions of capital routing that drive institutional desks worth more than any $500 vibe-coding course. Bookmark it & watch today. Then read the breakdown article below.

venus

32,194 views • 3 months ago

Don't waste 2 years learning to become a quant in 2026. MIT dropped a 2 hour course on financial mathematics for quants for free. • 00:00 - basic quant math terms • 55:02 - stochastic processes & Markov chains • 2:12:21 - building Black-Scholes options model Jane Street pays $1.2 million/year to quants who master this financial math from scratch. Bookmark & give it 2 hours today, no matter what. Then read the article below to build your own hedge fund.

Don't waste 2 years learning to become a quant in 2026. MIT dropped a 2 hour course on financial mathematics for quants for free. • 00:00 - basic quant math terms • 55:02 - stochastic processes & Markov chains • 2:12:21 - building Black-Scholes options model Jane Street pays $1.2 million/year to quants who master this financial math from scratch. Bookmark & give it 2 hours today, no matter what. Then read the article below to build your own hedge fund.

Roan

14,386 views • 1 month ago

As someone who reads every transformer paper that drops, this Fourier series lecture is the closest thing to a Google FNet explainer I've ever seen released for free. Everyone thinks attention is what makes transformers powerful. Google replaced attention with a 200-year-old Fourier transform. It nearly matched BERT and ran 7x faster. 25 minutes. Bookmark & watch today. Then read the article below - I broke down the 5 pieces of math the AI hype skips.

As someone who reads every transformer paper that drops, this Fourier series lecture is the closest thing to a Google FNet explainer I've ever seen released for free. Everyone thinks attention is what makes transformers powerful. Google replaced attention with a 200-year-old Fourier transform. It nearly matched BERT and ran 7x faster. 25 minutes. Bookmark & watch today. Then read the article below - I broke down the 5 pieces of math the AI hype skips.

fintex

100,785 views • 1 month ago

Jane Street pays $750K/year for quants who master large deviations and tail bounds. 82-minutes. free. By MIT professor. "Markov gives us a really bad bound, Chebyshev is pretty reasonable, Chernoff gives us exponential." here's what they cover: • Markov vs Chebyshev vs Chernoff bounds • bounding tail risk for extreme random variables • why variance alone fails in high-frequency regimes • exponential 10x tighter risk modeling Bookmark it & watch today. Then read the article below.

Jane Street pays $750K/year for quants who master large deviations and tail bounds. 82-minutes. free. By MIT professor. "Markov gives us a really bad bound, Chebyshev is pretty reasonable, Chernoff gives us exponential." here's what they cover: • Markov vs Chebyshev vs Chernoff bounds • bounding tail risk for extreme random variables • why variance alone fails in high-frequency regimes • exponential 10x tighter risk modeling Bookmark it & watch today. Then read the article below.

venus

62,068 views • 2 months ago

IBM just dropped a 100% free 1-hour course on mastering Graph Engineering from scratch. this is the clearest breakdown of graph memory and multi-agent orchestration you'll find anywhere : • 00:00 - Introduction to knowledge graphs • 05:35 - Building your first agentic graph • 19:59 - Agentic memory powered by graphs • 30:39 - Graphs for multi-agent orchestration it replaces 10 paid courses on agentic engineering. watch it today, then read the article below on how to become a knowledge graph engineer ↓

IBM just dropped a 100% free 1-hour course on mastering Graph Engineering from scratch. this is the clearest breakdown of graph memory and multi-agent orchestration you'll find anywhere : • 00:00 - Introduction to knowledge graphs • 05:35 - Building your first agentic graph • 19:59 - Agentic memory powered by graphs • 30:39 - Graphs for multi-agent orchestration it replaces 10 paid courses on agentic engineering. watch it today, then read the article below on how to become a knowledge graph engineer ↓

Avid

157,985 views • 1 month ago

Stanford CS professor just dropped the ultimate framework for building self-learning ai agents. 65-minutes. free. by stanford ai faculty. "reward hacking - your agent is gonna learn to do exactly what it is that you tell him to do" here's what they cover: •solving the credit assignment problem and delayed rewards •exploration vs exploitation trade-offs in high-stakes domains •model-based vs model-free system evaluation •4 foundational pillars of autonomous decision making Bookmark & watch today. Worth more than any $500 machine learning course.

Stanford CS professor just dropped the ultimate framework for building self-learning ai agents. 65-minutes. free. by stanford ai faculty. "reward hacking - your agent is gonna learn to do exactly what it is that you tell him to do" here's what they cover: •solving the credit assignment problem and delayed rewards •exploration vs exploitation trade-offs in high-stakes domains •model-based vs model-free system evaluation •4 foundational pillars of autonomous decision making Bookmark & watch today. Worth more than any $500 machine learning course.

venus

15,086 views • 2 months ago

Jane Street pays $400K+ to first-year traders out of college, no PhD required. This 26-minute mock interview with two actual Jane Street traders, Graham and Andrea, will teach you more about passing a quant trader interview than the entire Green Book. They walk through a real probability puzzle - exactly the kind that gets you cut in round 2 - and show you what interviewers actually look for. It's not the right answer. It's how you reason out loud. 26 minutes. Free. Watch it today. Then read the article below.

Jane Street pays $400K+ to first-year traders out of college, no PhD required. This 26-minute mock interview with two actual Jane Street traders, Graham and Andrea, will teach you more about passing a quant trader interview than the entire Green Book. They walk through a real probability puzzle - exactly the kind that gets you cut in round 2 - and show you what interviewers actually look for. It's not the right answer. It's how you reason out loud. 26 minutes. Free. Watch it today. Then read the article below.

zostaff

13,287 views • 4 months ago

the engineer who built Claude Code just dropped a 28-minute video on how to write prompts that actually work I've seen $300 courses that don't cover what he shows in the first 10 minutes CLAUDE.md files, memory shortcuts, parallel sessions, prompting patterns all in one video and completely free works whether you're a developer, a beginner, or someone who's been using Claude for months based on this, I put together 18 things you can copy and use in Claude today full guide in the article below

the engineer who built Claude Code just dropped a 28-minute video on how to write prompts that actually work I've seen $300 courses that don't cover what he shows in the first 10 minutes CLAUDE.md files, memory shortcuts, parallel sessions, prompting patterns all in one video and completely free works whether you're a developer, a beginner, or someone who's been using Claude for months based on this, I put together 18 things you can copy and use in Claude today full guide in the article below

Anatoli Kopadze

6,330,900 views • 3 months ago

Met a quant making mid-seven figures running systematic allocation at a quant fund. I asked him how he learned to build allocations that don't fall apart the moment market correlation shifts. He sent me the exact video that got him in. MIT's 79-minute portfolio management lecture. You won't find anything better about the actual math of diversification, risk parity, and why your weights swing wildly when you feed new data into a raw covariance matrix than this video. I watched it last night. Halfway through, I realized I had been running optimizers on raw sample covariance matrices for years and wondering why my allocations destabilized every time the window changed. Bookmark this and watch today. Then read the article below. • 00:00 - portfolio construction roadmap: sizing, objectives, and constraints • 30:23 - two-asset variance and correlation math • 35:34 - risk parity and why textbook MPT breaks • 40:20 - rebalancing discipline and why weight drift destroys your allocation

Met a quant making mid-seven figures running systematic allocation at a quant fund. I asked him how he learned to build allocations that don't fall apart the moment market correlation shifts. He sent me the exact video that got him in. MIT's 79-minute portfolio management lecture. You won't find anything better about the actual math of diversification, risk parity, and why your weights swing wildly when you feed new data into a raw covariance matrix than this video. I watched it last night. Halfway through, I realized I had been running optimizers on raw sample covariance matrices for years and wondering why my allocations destabilized every time the window changed. Bookmark this and watch today. Then read the article below. • 00:00 - portfolio construction roadmap: sizing, objectives, and constraints • 30:23 - two-asset variance and correlation math • 35:34 - risk parity and why textbook MPT breaks • 40:20 - rebalancing discipline and why weight drift destroys your allocation

Ruuj

31,417 views • 1 month ago

Andrew Ng just dropped 1-hour course on full agent engineering with Claude Code: 1 prompt → agents team → graphs from 0% to 100%: 10% → 10:45 - build your first agent in Claude Code 20% → 16:24 - Graphs: Claude Code for subagents 55% → 33:15 - agent for grunt work on a cheaper model 80% → 43:58 - your first model, running locally 100% → 49:57 - fully local: zero cloud, zero bill the only course that takes you from Claude Code prompt to fully local agent - by Andrew Ng watch it today - then read how to build full graph system in the article below ↓

Andrew Ng just dropped 1-hour course on full agent engineering with Claude Code: 1 prompt → agents team → graphs from 0% to 100%: 10% → 10:45 - build your first agent in Claude Code 20% → 16:24 - Graphs: Claude Code for subagents 55% → 33:15 - agent for grunt work on a cheaper model 80% → 43:58 - your first model, running locally 100% → 49:57 - fully local: zero cloud, zero bill the only course that takes you from Claude Code prompt to fully local agent - by Andrew Ng watch it today - then read how to build full graph system in the article below ↓

codila

26,302 views • 1 month ago

Alan Oppenheim, MIT professor: "Jump Trading pays quants $650K to pull one real signal out of market noise. I wrote the textbook on that exact math and taught it for free." this free MIT lecture is the math the whole "quant edge" is built on, and almost nobody selling you a course will name it. the man teaching it wrote the signal-processing textbook every engineer on earth learned from, and he put the lectures online for nothing. here is the idea. a price chart is a signal buried in noise. most of what you see is random static, and hidden inside is a faint, repeating pattern with real mathematics for pulling it out. that is not a metaphor. jim simons was a codebreaker who did exactly this to enemy transmissions, then pointed the same math at the market and made a hundred billion dollars. none of it is new. oppenheim taught this in 1987, the math is older, and every lecture is free. same story i told in the article above. the edge was never a secret formula. it was knowing a market is a noisy signal, and having the tools to read it. here is what the gurus skip. the math to separate signal from noise is free and everyone has it. the edge is cleaner data than the next desk, and the discipline to trust a faint signal across thousands of trades instead of chasing the static. the filter is free. the patience to use it is not.

Alan Oppenheim, MIT professor: "Jump Trading pays quants $650K to pull one real signal out of market noise. I wrote the textbook on that exact math and taught it for free." this free MIT lecture is the math the whole "quant edge" is built on, and almost nobody selling you a course will name it. the man teaching it wrote the signal-processing textbook every engineer on earth learned from, and he put the lectures online for nothing. here is the idea. a price chart is a signal buried in noise. most of what you see is random static, and hidden inside is a faint, repeating pattern with real mathematics for pulling it out. that is not a metaphor. jim simons was a codebreaker who did exactly this to enemy transmissions, then pointed the same math at the market and made a hundred billion dollars. none of it is new. oppenheim taught this in 1987, the math is older, and every lecture is free. same story i told in the article above. the edge was never a secret formula. it was knowing a market is a noisy signal, and having the tools to read it. here is what the gurus skip. the math to separate signal from noise is free and everyone has it. the edge is cleaner data than the next desk, and the discipline to trust a faint signal across thousands of trades instead of chasing the static. the filter is free. the patience to use it is not.

Rossst.03

281,905 views • 2 months ago

Over a decade ago, a math professor in Chennai opened his first lecture with the simplest idea in all of math, and it is the exact thing every prediction market runs on today. NPTEL filmed it. it has been free ever since. 759,000 people have watched it, almost none of them trade. his point: before probability, before any odds, there are just sets. a bag of everything that can happen, and the slice you are betting on. every trader pricing a market is doing set theory without knowing the name for it. no Wall Street badge, no trading desk. just a professor at a green board building the whole machine from nothing. skip to the board in the first ten minutes. he takes union, intersection, and the outcomes you throw away, and turns them into the rules every payoff has to obey, in notation a schoolkid can follow. no slides. no app. one green board and a piece of chalk. a quant i know rewatched this exact lecture before rebuilding his risk model. said he had been skipping the part that actually matters. I put the practical aspects of this lecture into practice and developed a strategy that generates income, the results surprised me. 27 days. $200 → $25,400. 74% win rate. Sharpe 2.47. I'm giving away the full configuration of my bot for free. 24 hours only. Here's how: >Comment "SEND" >Like and Follow me I'll send the complete setup in your DMs.

Over a decade ago, a math professor in Chennai opened his first lecture with the simplest idea in all of math, and it is the exact thing every prediction market runs on today. NPTEL filmed it. it has been free ever since. 759,000 people have watched it, almost none of them trade. his point: before probability, before any odds, there are just sets. a bag of everything that can happen, and the slice you are betting on. every trader pricing a market is doing set theory without knowing the name for it. no Wall Street badge, no trading desk. just a professor at a green board building the whole machine from nothing. skip to the board in the first ten minutes. he takes union, intersection, and the outcomes you throw away, and turns them into the rules every payoff has to obey, in notation a schoolkid can follow. no slides. no app. one green board and a piece of chalk. a quant i know rewatched this exact lecture before rebuilding his risk model. said he had been skipping the part that actually matters. I put the practical aspects of this lecture into practice and developed a strategy that generates income, the results surprised me. 27 days. $200 → $25,400. 74% win rate. Sharpe 2.47. I'm giving away the full configuration of my bot for free. 24 hours only. Here's how: >Comment "SEND" >Like and Follow me I'll send the complete setup in your DMs.

Voltex

27,825 views • 19 days ago

a quant who started as a technical trader explained what changed everything for him he stopped trying to predict where price goes he started measuring the probability of each market state and betting only when the math was asymmetric that shift took him from drawing trendlines to writing models at 22 the realization was simple but brutal: technical analysis gives you a narrative quantitative analysis gives you a number one feels right the other is testable, repeatable, and either works or doesn't across 10,000 trades the setup on his desk tells the whole story no TradingView. no candlestick charts. just code, data, and a terminal he didn't go to MIT he didn't intern at Goldman he learned Python, statistics, and probability theory on his own and built something that actually worked > the math: free in any stats textbook > the data: free on Yahoo Finance, FRED, exchange APIs > the code: Python, 200 lines, running on a laptop > the barrier: not intelligence. just knowing this path exists most people spend years staring at indicators from the 1970s wondering why they can't find consistency the answer was never a better indicator it was a completely different framework one that treats trading as a math problem, not a prediction game full breakdown in the video below

a quant who started as a technical trader explained what changed everything for him he stopped trying to predict where price goes he started measuring the probability of each market state and betting only when the math was asymmetric that shift took him from drawing trendlines to writing models at 22 the realization was simple but brutal: technical analysis gives you a narrative quantitative analysis gives you a number one feels right the other is testable, repeatable, and either works or doesn't across 10,000 trades the setup on his desk tells the whole story no TradingView. no candlestick charts. just code, data, and a terminal he didn't go to MIT he didn't intern at Goldman he learned Python, statistics, and probability theory on his own and built something that actually worked > the math: free in any stats textbook > the data: free on Yahoo Finance, FRED, exchange APIs > the code: Python, 200 lines, running on a laptop > the barrier: not intelligence. just knowing this path exists most people spend years staring at indicators from the 1970s wondering why they can't find consistency the answer was never a better indicator it was a completely different framework one that treats trading as a math problem, not a prediction game full breakdown in the video below

delost

112,271 views • 2 months ago

an ex-Goldman banker said the key to understanding markets is reading 3 WSJ articles a day a quant at Renaissance would tell you that's the exact wrong input here's why the Wall Street Journal publishes after the move by the time you read "tech stocks fall on rate fears" the move already happened, the positioning already shifted, and every algorithm already repriced news explains what happened. it doesn't predict what's next quant desks don't read news to form trade ideas they measure whether news has a statistically significant effect on price after controlling for everything else the answer, across decades of academic research: individual news articles explain less than 0.5% of daily price variance the other 99.5% is flow, positioning, regime, volatility structure, and cross-asset correlation none of which shows up in a WSJ headline this is the Goldman mindset vs the quant mindset Goldman: read narratives, form opinions, act on conviction Renaissance: measure everything, strip out noise, trade only what survives statistical testing one produced traders who sound smart at dinner parties the other produced $100 billion in profit over 30 years > WSJ subscription: $468/year > SEC EDGAR data: free > FRED economic data: free > exchange-level order flow: free > academic papers on news impact studies: free on ArXiv since the 2000s the banker tells you to read the news the quant tells you to measure whether the news matters those are not the same instruction full breakdown in the video below

an ex-Goldman banker said the key to understanding markets is reading 3 WSJ articles a day a quant at Renaissance would tell you that's the exact wrong input here's why the Wall Street Journal publishes after the move by the time you read "tech stocks fall on rate fears" the move already happened, the positioning already shifted, and every algorithm already repriced news explains what happened. it doesn't predict what's next quant desks don't read news to form trade ideas they measure whether news has a statistically significant effect on price after controlling for everything else the answer, across decades of academic research: individual news articles explain less than 0.5% of daily price variance the other 99.5% is flow, positioning, regime, volatility structure, and cross-asset correlation none of which shows up in a WSJ headline this is the Goldman mindset vs the quant mindset Goldman: read narratives, form opinions, act on conviction Renaissance: measure everything, strip out noise, trade only what survives statistical testing one produced traders who sound smart at dinner parties the other produced $100 billion in profit over 30 years > WSJ subscription: $468/year > SEC EDGAR data: free > FRED economic data: free > exchange-level order flow: free > academic papers on news impact studies: free on ArXiv since the 2000s the banker tells you to read the news the quant tells you to measure whether the news matters those are not the same instruction full breakdown in the video below

delost

15,317 views • 2 months ago

a citadel options trader told me the one concept they test first in every quant interview and it's been sitting on a free website for years not a hedge fund textbook, not a $3,000 prep program. a free course syllabus - options greeks, volatility, quizzes - publicly available, almost nobody applying has ever opened it concept is expected value across a probability distribution retail looks at a chart and asks which direction. quant looks at expected payout across every possible outcome and asks if that number beats the cost of the trade - completely different question options pricing is just EV made rigorous fair value of any position = sum of (each outcome's probability x its payoff), discounted back. that formula is in every intro stats course and every free options curriculum these firms post publicly citadel's first round isn't a stock pitch or a DCF it's a market-making problem: "set me a bid and ask on a coin flip" if you can solve that fast and size it correctly, you can price any derivative on earth prep is documented in 6 categories: probability, greeks, volatility, mental math, coding, microstructure firms don't want you pattern-matching to old trades. they want raw EV instinct - and that's in free courses that have been online for years entry-level quant traders at these firms start at $300k. senior traders clear $650k+ most people never make it past round 1. not because they weren't smart - because nobody told them what the test was actually measuring Bookmark this they kept you reading charts while they were drilling expected value at 2am

a citadel options trader told me the one concept they test first in every quant interview and it's been sitting on a free website for years not a hedge fund textbook, not a $3,000 prep program. a free course syllabus - options greeks, volatility, quizzes - publicly available, almost nobody applying has ever opened it concept is expected value across a probability distribution retail looks at a chart and asks which direction. quant looks at expected payout across every possible outcome and asks if that number beats the cost of the trade - completely different question options pricing is just EV made rigorous fair value of any position = sum of (each outcome's probability x its payoff), discounted back. that formula is in every intro stats course and every free options curriculum these firms post publicly citadel's first round isn't a stock pitch or a DCF it's a market-making problem: "set me a bid and ask on a coin flip" if you can solve that fast and size it correctly, you can price any derivative on earth prep is documented in 6 categories: probability, greeks, volatility, mental math, coding, microstructure firms don't want you pattern-matching to old trades. they want raw EV instinct - and that's in free courses that have been online for years entry-level quant traders at these firms start at $300k. senior traders clear $650k+ most people never make it past round 1. not because they weren't smart - because nobody told them what the test was actually measuring Bookmark this they kept you reading charts while they were drilling expected value at 2am

Livsun

25,988 views • 3 months ago

a quant at citadel told me something that broke my entire trading framework "we don't predict markets. we model the state machine" he explained markov cains in 90 seconds the market is never random - it always exists in one of three states trending up, trending down, ranging - each has a fixed probability of shifting to another build the transition matrix from real price data: trending up -> 68% stays trending, 21% flips to range, 11% reverses ranging -> 54% stays range, 28% breaks up, 18% breaks down trending down -> 61% stays falling, 24% flips to range, 15% reverses now you're not guessing, you're playing probability identify current state, enter with the 68% edge, size with kelly criterion based on that probability the formula is public - andrei markov published it in 1906 hedge funds use it every day, the math costs nothing what costs you is asking the wrong question "where is price going" is random "what state am I in right now" has an answer transition matrix built from 10 years of data is your edge Bookmark and use in your own strategy 37 years without a losing year, 66% annual returns paper is free, data is free, implementation is 200 lines of python they kept you staring at candles while they ran probability tables

a quant at citadel told me something that broke my entire trading framework "we don't predict markets. we model the state machine" he explained markov cains in 90 seconds the market is never random - it always exists in one of three states trending up, trending down, ranging - each has a fixed probability of shifting to another build the transition matrix from real price data: trending up -> 68% stays trending, 21% flips to range, 11% reverses ranging -> 54% stays range, 28% breaks up, 18% breaks down trending down -> 61% stays falling, 24% flips to range, 15% reverses now you're not guessing, you're playing probability identify current state, enter with the 68% edge, size with kelly criterion based on that probability the formula is public - andrei markov published it in 1906 hedge funds use it every day, the math costs nothing what costs you is asking the wrong question "where is price going" is random "what state am I in right now" has an answer transition matrix built from 10 years of data is your edge Bookmark and use in your own strategy 37 years without a losing year, 66% annual returns paper is free, data is free, implementation is 200 lines of python they kept you staring at candles while they ran probability tables

Livsun

19,650 views • 20 days ago

Paul Tudor Jones asked Stan Druckenmiller what he thought about Ray Dalio, who had said a day earlier that even with perfect research he still wanted 15 equally sized, uncorrelated bets: “I have the polar opposite investment philosophy. Put all your eggs in one basket and watch the basket carefully” this is him explaining how large his positions actually became, the four days in which he lost $1 billion, and what Paul Tudor Jones told him on the phone the morning he finally gave up “I’ve had a 350% long-equivalent position in 10-year bonds. In currencies, I’ve had 200% to 300% of my NAV in a single currency. My track record in those positions is much better than in the others” “I bought the NASDAQ beautifully in 1999, sold it in early 2000, then bought at the exact top. I knew I was trapped. By the time I cleaned up the mess I had created, it had probably cost me 15%” bookmark & watch the full conversation, then read the article below ↓

Paul Tudor Jones asked Stan Druckenmiller what he thought about Ray Dalio, who had said a day earlier that even with perfect research he still wanted 15 equally sized, uncorrelated bets: “I have the polar opposite investment philosophy. Put all your eggs in one basket and watch the basket carefully” this is him explaining how large his positions actually became, the four days in which he lost $1 billion, and what Paul Tudor Jones told him on the phone the morning he finally gave up “I’ve had a 350% long-equivalent position in 10-year bonds. In currencies, I’ve had 200% to 300% of my NAV in a single currency. My track record in those positions is much better than in the others” “I bought the NASDAQ beautifully in 1999, sold it in early 2000, then bought at the exact top. I knew I was trapped. By the time I cleaned up the mess I had created, it had probably cost me 15%” bookmark & watch the full conversation, then read the article below ↓

0xDipper

73,796 views • 1 day ago

i gave Claude PhD-level formulas and told it to build a trading terminal no questions. it shipped MiroFish 274 agents. 4 quant models running live doing what most Polymarket traders can’t: every 5 seconds it: scans all contracts updates probabilities with bayesian logic calculates expected value vs market price sizes positions using ¼ Kelly checks cross-market inefficiencies (KL divergence) no gut feelings. no “this looks cheap” just math the same kind funds guard behind NDAs here’s 14 days of output: day 2 bayesian model caught early signals on Iran talks 0.31 → 0.58 probability shift bought YES at $0.33 price hit $0.61 by day 5 $2,180 day 6 inefficiency detected between correlated markets primary win: $0.70 general win: $0.48 historically should be ~62% long general + hedge primary converged by day 9 $3,740 day 9 weather mispricing market: 22% model: 41% strong positive EV position sized at 11% event confirmed $4,890 day 11–14 rates hold contract mispriced market: 65% base rate: 74% (given unemployment <4%) entered at $0.65 settled at $0.98 $4,663 total: +$15,473 in 14 days not predictions just probabilities most traders lose because they follow intuition the edge comes from math Copytrade → MiroFish doesn’t read opinions it processes distributions 274 agents zero эмоций continuous recalculation i just watch the PnL update you don’t need to be a quant you just need quant logic running nonstop

i gave Claude PhD-level formulas and told it to build a trading terminal no questions. it shipped MiroFish 274 agents. 4 quant models running live doing what most Polymarket traders can’t: every 5 seconds it: scans all contracts updates probabilities with bayesian logic calculates expected value vs market price sizes positions using ¼ Kelly checks cross-market inefficiencies (KL divergence) no gut feelings. no “this looks cheap” just math the same kind funds guard behind NDAs here’s 14 days of output: day 2 bayesian model caught early signals on Iran talks 0.31 → 0.58 probability shift bought YES at $0.33 price hit $0.61 by day 5 $2,180 day 6 inefficiency detected between correlated markets primary win: $0.70 general win: $0.48 historically should be ~62% long general + hedge primary converged by day 9 $3,740 day 9 weather mispricing market: 22% model: 41% strong positive EV position sized at 11% event confirmed $4,890 day 11–14 rates hold contract mispriced market: 65% base rate: 74% (given unemployment <4%) entered at $0.65 settled at $0.98 $4,663 total: +$15,473 in 14 days not predictions just probabilities most traders lose because they follow intuition the edge comes from math Copytrade → MiroFish doesn’t read opinions it processes distributions 274 agents zero эмоций continuous recalculation i just watch the PnL update you don’t need to be a quant you just need quant logic running nonstop

Discover

45,309 views • 5 months ago