How do famous swing traders like Dan Zanger size up so fast?

[ironchef]

This is a very tough business with a low barrier to entry.There are no stipulated minimum requirements,which affords one to take shortcuts..

By not hard,all I meant was putting in the time and doing as much prep work as possible..What else can we do??

Thanks again for the coaching.

 

[M.W.]

You are the sheep who looks at one of Jesse Livermore's biggest gains and declares all the naysayers idiots. The constant implosions due to poorly managed risk became so intolerable, he ended his life. That's before even verifying the guy really made that much or just 1/10th of claimed amount.

YES WE HAVE AN AGENDA: we try to educate. There are almost always fallacies involved in getting rich quick schemes. But I guess that does not matter to those who have been poor all their lives.

LOL

1/ Listen to the the ex- and institutional & fundie wannabe fktards COPING

"He took too much risk" they said
"He didn't do this or that metric"

Translation: "He made $100 MM the wrong way!"

LMAO...there's no wrong way to make $100 MM

There are no "rules".
Maybe in "your book" there is

The only thing that matters with others IRL is that you did it (in this case, 9 figures).
He did it.
Not how you did it

Y'all sound like whiny little beetches COPING hard because he didn't do it "your way".
No one cares about your fancy market-neutral, statistical arbitrage model. Whoop de do.

Fking autistic nerds must be a riot at parties.
You know the the types.
Within the first 30 sec of meeting them they're spitting out their resume, achievements & work experience. Insecure fktards. Bwhahaha


2/ What was the actual maximum money at risk?

$50,000 or w/e initial stake
The grub stake. That's it

So how TF did he "take too much risk"?
It was $50,000 (or w/e) he was prepared to lose.
Whether he was up $20 MM or not, the max stake at risk he could lose was still $50,000.
His account couldn't go debit (contingent liabilities), he wasn't trading electricity.
He was trading stocks

He is responsible & accountable to himself only.
He was trading his own money.
He wasn't trading OPM or your money.
He doesn't have to answer to some boss or anyone.
He doesn't want to go institutional with a "track record"

So who gives a shit that his risk tolerance doesn't agree with yours


3/ Elsewhere in business, accumulating $100 MM from a tiny stake $50,000 (or w/e) is admired

But NOT in trading...if they didn't do it "your way". LOL

No one ever says about entrepreneurs who make $100 MM starting from a tiny $50,000, "he took too much risk!"

(Translation: "He made $100 MM the wrong way!")

It's admired, the proverbial rags to riches story

(for said entrepreneur, the max at-risk capital to lose is say $50,000 the initial stake, same initial stake as the trader)


Same reward ($100MM) & risk ($50,000) for both entrepreneur & trader

Yet IYI (intelligent yet idiots) treat it differently & irrationally

Clearly they have a agenda

LOL

 

[tsfx]

You are the sheep who looks at one of Jesse Livermore's biggest gains and declares all the naysayers idiots. The constant implosions due to poorly managed risk became so intolerable, he ended his life. That's before even verifying the guy really made that much or just 1/10th of claimed amount.

YES WE HAVE AN AGENDA: we try to educate. There are almost always fallacies involved in getting rich quick schemes. But I guess that does not matter to those who have been poor all their lives.

I admire your effort in this thread M.W.

 

[Laissez Faire]

You guys are a bit too gullible. Yes there are plenty of ways to make money investing and trading. However, there's a distinction between luck and skill. To know whether someone is skillful, you would need to not just audit their performance but also conduct an attribution analysis. This is a widely followed process in the institutional space (you don't think sovereign wealth funds, family offices, and other institutional investors are looking for pnl?!).


Let me explain why this is important. If I take 10k and buy some calls on a basket of 10 stocks, I may "get lucky" with 1 stock that takes my 10k to Xmm+. Skill means having a process that is repeatable and can be used to find opportunities.


I have no doubt that the traders named previously have made money. Where I am skeptical is in whether they are actually skillful (as opposed to lucky). If they are lucky, then they are not a good source to learn from. If they are skillful, then they are.


Evidence of skill would be: hit rate above 50-55%, attribution of pnl coming from lots of sources (and not just a small handful of mega trades), proof in the performance of some underlying factor.


Another illustration to evidence skill vs. luck -- how applicable are the skills they teach vs. hedge fund jobs? Wouldn't a successful retail trader be able to "grow" into a hedge fund role? Yes if they are skillful, no if they are lucky (because you can see right through the luck vs. skill argument based upon attribution details).


For you retail traders -- keep up the hope and learn to build a style that suits you.

Good morning, longandshort,

How nice of you to step down from your high horse and attempt to educate us common people.

Here’s where you’re wrong and miss the mark.

1. Not recognizing the difference between institutional trading and retail trading, nor your audience:

The average ET member is a retail trader and is not interested in being a fund manager.

2. Process and repeatability: If you even bothered to take a look before lashing out your criticism, you would know that Quallamaggie have a repeatable process and traded with a fairly high frequency even if he was a swing trader. He didn’t buy a growth stock or Bitcoin that he forgot about and cashed in 20 years later.

3. Hit rate: Essentially meaningless. All else equal, the higher, the better of course, but in isolation this doesn’t mean anything.

 

[Laissez Faire]

Don't be a lame duck and change topic and make it about me. So, you can't provide any track records and clearly take those guys' word for it. I find that naive and borderline idiotic, but to each his own.

You serious? Why should I provide a track record of Quallamaggie's returns?

How about you provide the track record of some traders that are audited by Ernst & Young? I’d be surprised if you could.

Anyone who’s paid any attention to my posts know that I repeatedly lash out against educators and fakers (>95 % of posters on ET as well) in this business, but Quallamaggie comes across as the real deal in my book for various reasons. If you require an audited track record to believe it’s actually possible to make money in this business, maybe move on and do something else.

I’m not even a student or follower of Quallamaggie. Only taken the occasional look. If at any point I would pursue swing trading I wouldn’t hesitate to study him closer and learn from him.

 

[longandshort]

Good morning, longandshort,

Good morning...

The average ET member is a retail trader and is not interested in being a fund manager.

Do you want to make money or not? You're trading in the same market as the professionals. There's a reason why you're cumulative pnl is deeply red.

2. Process and repeatability: If you even bothered to take a look before lashing out your criticism, you would know that Quallamaggie have a repeatable process and traded with a fairly high frequency even if he was a swing trader. He didn’t buy a growth stock or Bitcoin that he forgot about and cashed in 20 years later.

you don't know that. If you did, then you have his attribution data, and I'll stand corrected.

3. Hit rate: Essentially meaningless.

Ok, keep betting on coinflips with a b/a spread. See my comment re: cumulative pnl.

 

[tsfx]

You serious? Why should I provide a track record of Quallamaggie's returns?

How about you provide the track record of some traders that are audited by Ernst & Young? I’d be surprised if you could.

Anyone who’s paid any attention to my posts know that I repeatedly lash out against educators and fakers (>95 % of posters on ET as well) in this business, but Quallamaggie comes across as the real deal in my book for various reasons. If you require an audited track record to believe it’s actually possible to make money in this business, maybe move on and do something else.

I’m not even a student or follower of Quallamaggie. Only taken the occasional look. If at any point I would pursue swing trading I wouldn’t hesitate to study him closer and learn from him.

I think we are moving away from the main topic here which was about the speed of gains.

KQ strategy is fine, he trades the breakouts, so he is in the direction that price moves, nothing special about that and he can definitely get positive results out of it as long as markets move.

The sceptisim in me popped out when i'm doing the math. I know how much markets move, how much they range and KQ has clearly pointed out that he wins like 30% of the time which perfectly lines up with the overall statistics of how markets trend.

Now, this kind of statistics can't possibly yield to these results. You need a near 100% win rate to make these gains. Not to mention high position size but that invalidates any risk management rules he promotes. So, did he miraculously picked the right time and direction all the time? Not likely, but sure, possible.

What M.W. pointed out is the crave for social engagement. Now, USUALLY, when there's a success story as big as this in the markets, it is accompanied with a very low profile. But, again, i guess exeptions confirm the rule.

So, in the end, who knows what the truth is. But i can say from my experiment in the twitter space that fintwit category is probably one the most lying, cheating and manipulating social environment out there. The lying there is just next level. The way the advertising has gone aggressive is just fenomenal. Just to get you subscribed. Oh well...

 

[Laissez Faire]

Do you want to make money or not? You're trading in the same market as the professionals. There's a reason why you're cumulative pnl is deeply red.

That's irrelevant to this discussion. But frankly, you know as much about my PnL as I know about yours. Which is zero.

you don't know that. If you did, then you have his attribution data, and I'll stand corrected.

I know that because he spelled out his strategy and to my awareness he's been streaming his trading daily for longer periods doing the exact same thing over and over again. Disclaimer: Never watched it myself.

Ok, keep betting on coinflips with a b/a spread. See my comment re: cumulative pnl.

Nobody said anything about coinflips. But a common theme among even successful hedge fund managers (Soros, Simons, etc.) is that their hit rate isn't much above 50 %, but that they make for more when they win than when they lose.

 

[Darc]

Good morning, longandshort,

How nice of you to step down from your high horse and attempt to educate us common people.

Here’s where you’re wrong and miss the mark.

1. Not recognizing the difference between institutional trading and retail trading, nor your audience:

The average ET member is a retail trader and is not interested in being a fund manager.

2. Process and repeatability: If you even bothered to take a look before lashing out your criticism, you would know that Quallamaggie have a repeatable process and traded with a fairly high frequency even if he was a swing trader. He didn’t buy a growth stock or Bitcoin that he forgot about and cashed in 20 years later.

3. Hit rate: Essentially meaningless. All else equal, the higher, the better of course, but in isolation this doesn’t mean anything.

I agree, must be a full Moon.

Whack that in yah back Trunk https://qullamaggie.com/my-3-timeless-setups-that-have-made-me-tens-of-millions/

Now, which kunt wanted a KQ monthly breakdown?

 

[Laissez Faire]

What M.W. pointed out is the crave for social engagement. Now, USUALLY, when there's a success story as big as this in the markets, it is accompanied with a very low profile. But, again, i guess exeptions confirm the rule.

So, in the end, who knows what the truth is. But i can say from my experiment in the twitter space that fintwit category is probably one the most lying, cheating and manipulating social environment out there. The lying there is just next level. The way the advertising has gone aggressive is just fenomenal. Just to get you subscribed. Oh well...

Kristjan is a lonely retail trader. Is it that hard to see the need for social engagement trading on his own? Isn't that why we all gravitate to ET?

Here's Kritjans tax returns for 2021:

De tjänade mest pengar 2021 – Bianca Ingrosso yngst på listan (nyheter24.se)

360 million SEK which is roughly $35 million.

I highly doubt he earned that from Twitch streams.

If you look further, I'm sure you'll be able to dig up his tax records from former and later years, too. This is public information in Sweden (as in Norway).