However, I’ve given myself to the end of this week to reach my goal of 90%+ daily success rates, so all is not lost quite yet. The average loss was -$5.09 whereas the average gain was +$4.41, so I also have a little bit of work to do in that regard (as well).
I tried to get around the fact that trading my Numerical Price Prediction system correctly demands the ongoing monitoring of positions (which I am unable to do at this time) by adopting what I’m calling a structural swing trade methodology based on price location within the day range and color of daily candlesticks.
However, only six of seven trades were successful (approximately 86%) so I was still unable to manage 93.33%+, and the average loss (–$3.01) was still greater than the average gain (+$2.22)
Nonetheless, I would argue that since I bailed prematurely (adjusted my take-profit targets) on all these positions due to my not yet having confidence in this new modification to my trading regiment—EURAUD and AUDJPY should really count as two trades—not four. This would put my average gain at about +$3.33, though it would drag the daily success rate down to only 80%.
Still, this would satisfy my personal search for evidence that a relatively high success rate does not necessarily require a relatively low average gain, unless one categorizes a 1:1 win/loss ratio as low, which I don’t. I view it as the minimum acceptable, and define low as anything below this (i.e., 1:2, 3:5, etc.).
Moreover, I suspect that once I have enough confidence in this new version of my system to remain with trades until my original take-profit targets are hit, the win/loss ratio will likely increase to something like 2:1 with a corresponding reduction in the average daily success rate being highly unlikely, since my experience suggests there will be numerous days in which I suffer no losing trades at all (i.e. 100% success), but relatively few where my win rate will fall below 80%. That said, I think I will end my reactions to the title assigned to this thread here.
