Search results

Remember: the better your starting edge, the less starting capital you need. Work on getting a great edge as much as getting capital.

When I think of "trading plan", I think of the definition you give for "method", so this is just semantics. More to the point, no trading rules are bulletproof. If they were, you'd never have a losing trade. IOW you'd have the Holy Grail. There is no Holy Grail. You don't need a holy grail in...

Caitlin Jenner has never had a single menstrual cycle. It (yes, it) has never had PMS, and it will never know the 'joy' of menopause. It thinks being a woman is all about make-up and dresses. LOL indeed.

This world gets crazier by the decade.

What bothers me is the push to accept this madness. Bruce Jenner is free to mutilate himself and change his name but he will never earn the right to be referred to as 'she' or 'her'. He has no more succeeded in turning himself into a woman than Michael Jackson succeeded in turning himself into...

This is why I emphasize proper sizing. You only get small during a drawdown. Once you start winning again, you increase trade size again. This is all automatic if you use the Kelly formula I supplied.

You guys are funny. This is why I emphasize proper sizing. You only get small during a drawdown. Once you start winning again, you increase trade size again. This is all automatic if you use the Kelly formula I supplied.

Those making $100k/month prolly want to make more. Or maybe they've achieved a happy medium and don't want to rock the boat. In either case, why would they be eager to invite in new competition aka YOU? Do you plan to ask what they trade, and how often? Oops, there goes some future trades...

To grow your trading account the fastest safely, use the new Kelly formula: max[ 0, s1 ]*(s2*s2 - s1*s3)/(s2*s2*s2 + s1*s1*s4 - 2*s1*s2*s3)

*sigh* Let's try this from the top. There are three questions every trader must answer before trading: "When do I enter my next trade?" "How much money do I place on my next trade?" "When do I exit my next trade?" The first and last questions are about timing. This is what people usually...

There is a semantics issue here. Money management has nothing to do with cutting losses and letting profits run. Those are done by you trading strategy, i.e., the thing that produces your edge. Money management is position sizing: "How much do I put on my next trade?" This is ultimately...

Not seeing why you need to build a money management strategy, it's already been built. The best public-domain estimate of your optimal trading fraction is Max[ 0, s1 ]*(s2*s2 - s1*s3)/(s2*s2*s2 + s1*s1*s4 - 2*s1*s2*s3) , where Sx == sum[ (Ri)^x ]_i=1toN ; x == 1, 2, 3, 4...

All that article says is that random trading is unprofitable, something even a lot of idiots have figured out already. Nobody needs a MC sim to tell them that only a small percentage of long sequences of coin flips are going to be significantly heads. Nobody needs a MC sim to tell them that...

I use the automated cashiers at my supermarket all the time. Those things are mega-glitchy and require a full-time worker present at all times running from machine to machine to clear up some issue with a customer. A recent unpleasant development is shortchanging. A sign of times to come.

Which is why they are now known as banksters.

Not completely in agreement. Trading in the sense we use it in this website consists of two transactions: an entry and an exit. Whereas buying strawberries or any other desired thing is expected to be a single transaction, a single exchange of value for value. It is the additional risk of two...

Don't lose money = don't trade. Problem solved. If you want to make money, you have to trade. Trading = risk taking. Risk taking = occasionally you WILL lose money. So here are your choices: Don't lose money = stop pretending to be a trader. Trading = stop whining about occasional losses.

Those who say something can't be done should stay the hell out of the way of those who are doing it.

I believe the rationale is that luck comes in bunches and going against a trend jinxes it or the gambler. Most gamblers are a superstitious lot. My Kelly fraction for a negative-expectation game is zero so that is what I bet: zero.

I doubt it's very common but I'll grant it's more likely than roulette spins. Stocks do have a generally upward drift.