Quote from d08:
So it's okay if you had all the winners inside a 2 year period but your sample size is 10 years? A system that returns 200% in 2008 but 5% in the previous 3 years is not a good one, whatever the win ratio or average return says.
"Win ratio" knows no calendar. If your win ratio is 55% but your annual return is only 5%, your method needs work.
Seems everyone wants to be "consistent"... however one wants to define it.
But just as in business where "80% of profits come from 20% of customers"... trading is like that.. where 80% of profits come from 20% of trades.
Trading is more like hitting in baseball... You'd LIKE to get a hit every game, sometimes more than one... but you're more likely to have a stretch where you go 15/30, then later go 0-25. Yet in each at bat, you're trying to do the same thing... get the bat on the ball and hope it finds a hole.
Personally, I don't bother with the notion of "consistency"... seems irrelevant.
