Search results

Thanks for your thoughts. But not sure what you are saying, exactly. If you never risk more than 2% per trade, then why can’t I do the same thing? Let’s say I trade $200k, and only put 2% at risk. That’s $4k per trade. How am I blowing up my whole account?

Good points. Based on the responses, I should probably add the following: - $50k/month would be on average; doesn't need to be $50k every month - the $1mm number can fluctuate; so if I had a big run of losers, then yes the value would go down, but ideally still making the $600k/year I realize...

Also, I realize my math is a little off. I would need to make $6k per winning trade to achieve my goals, while only losing $4k per trade, assuming 25 winners and 25 losers per month.

Also, for some reason I didn't see all the other activity. I apologize if my latest post restates what people already wrote. To the person who said - maybe he is thinking about your responses, I am - thanks.

Thank you all for your replies. Given the parameters I have laid out, consensus is that it's probably not going to happen. I appreciate your honesty. A few thoughts/comments: - Jim Simons chooses to manage "billions" of $$$; achieving super-high returns on this level of assets consistently is...

Would like to get some feedback on the following "not so hypothetical". Consider the following constraints: - U.S.-based brokerage account with $1 million in cash - monthly target of 5%/month; this will be withdrawn, so account won't grow - max trade limit of 50 trades/month - ideally no more...