It is was everyone would be doing it 
1% a day consistently: possible?
- Thread starter stephencrowley
- Start date
You would probably have a better chance of getting 30% in 15 days on a little flyer 
Quote from RedManPlus:
You need a good spanking, boy.
You're problems go waaaay beyond "arrogance".
Compounding MUST be assumed at 1%/day.
It produces a geometric return...
That will hit a ceiling for any number of reasons.
You're position...
That somehow one can have a linear 1%/day return is bizarre.
rm+
I heartily disagree. Rather than a compounding, which is a school of logic that we have all seemed to ascribe to, I believe we need to talk on a reality and net basis.
Yes, with compounding placed in the mix, the failure outcome is definite. Unavoidably you will hit the "impossible" realm in the numbers. But if you base this on an "real, actual cash" basis and set a goal, 1% is very attainable. The problem is, when you get there, all of a sudden it is perceived as no money.
I can't tell you how many threads that I have read (and participated in) that contain the statement that XXX is no money and how the bills they currently have couldn't be paid with the pittance. All of a sudden the material goods scenario is the measure of if you're making it. With $50,000 of working capital, making $500 a day profit is very possible. THERE IS NO NEED TO COMPOUND AND MAX OUT THIS RETURN!
Over 250 days that equates to $125,000. That's a nice income, or supplemental earning. Anyone doing this should be applauded and encouraged to continue. And there are those who "ARE" doing this.
Another way to look at it:
George Soros can be considered the ceiling of what is possible in the long term...
Roughly 30-35% over 30 years after fees.
I would guess he had 1 year out of 30 where he did 250%.
Also...
His returns were boosted by systematic market manipulation...
Of the kind that would be illegal in highly regulated environments like the US.
I find it bizarre that people are actually taking 1%/day seriously at all.
rm+
George Soros can be considered the ceiling of what is possible in the long term...
Roughly 30-35% over 30 years after fees.
I would guess he had 1 year out of 30 where he did 250%.
Also...
His returns were boosted by systematic market manipulation...
Of the kind that would be illegal in highly regulated environments like the US.
I find it bizarre that people are actually taking 1%/day seriously at all.
rm+
Quote from canyonman00:
I heartily disagree. Rather than a compounding, which is a school of logic that we have all seemed to ascribe to, I believe we need to talk on a reality and net basis.
Yes, with compounding placed in the mix, the failure outcome is definite. Unavoidably you will hit the "impossible" realm in the numbers. But if you base this on an "real, actual cash" basis and set a goal, 1% is very attainable. The problem is, when you get there, all of a sudden it is perceived as no money.
I can't tell you how many threads that I have read (and participated in) that contain the statement that XXX is no money and how the bills they currently have couldn't be paid with the pittance. All of a sudden the material goods scenario is the measure of if you're making it. With $50,000 of working capital, making $500 a day profit is very possible. THERE IS NO NEED TO COMPOUND AND MAX OUT THIS RETURN!
Over 250 days that equates to $125,000. That's a nice income, or supplemental earning. Anyone doing this should be applauded and encouraged to continue. And there are those who "ARE" doing this.
Unlimited compounding is a dream for newbies. Once you have traded 5 to 10 years you see things differently. Instead of calculating with compounding returns how fast you will be one of the richest men in the world, you start thinking and calculating based on your experience and reality. Compounding can be used till you reach certain limits, from there on you take your profits and invest them elsewhere.
But the "compounding boys" first have to try to get thru the stage of becoming an experienced and profitable trader. Only then they will realize there are limits to compounding. Once you reach a certain size in trading you will not compound anymore. But as i said, you have to be profitable to know what i mean.
Even without the compounding I wonder if you really understand the purpose of this thread. The keyword is consistently. You have claimed, in the previous post, that if you can make 250% a year, it's ok. And the question is can you repeat it. In other words, can you make it consistently?
I agree. I have occasionally presented the compounding argument in the past just to illustrate the impact of compounding, particularly when the rate of return is in the order of what is being discussed here. However, I imagine that, theoretically, the practical ceiling need not be reached too quickly since the trader can expand into additional markets as his trading account grows. And only a fool would not exploit the mathematics of compounding to the extent possible with such glorious returns, even if it degrades the actual percentage somewhat. It is the people who boast about generating such daily returns on a regular basis and who criticize any compounding at all that I find particularly foolish and annoying.
So, yes, let's go with the middle ground, shall we?
P.S. And, as I have noted before, I seriously doubt the validity of any claims about making 1% a day consistently and without any down weeks, which was the original question.
It seems like people on these threads are always comparing completely different trading styles. For the average retail daytrader (50-100k account size) who lives off of trading income and regularly sweeps out profits, 1% a day on trading capital is more than achievable. For the fund manager controlling millions it's obviously a different story.
