So many replies ignore what I typed. It's interesting but frustrating. No, that is not "the source" it is "one reason", like I already said. The person was selected for the projections, the backtesting and talking a good talk, like I said.Quote from heech:
Is this the source of your confusion? You think this person, whoever he is, is being funded because he "projected something like 10% for a month"?
I can guarantee you no remotely sophisticated investor will EVER select an investment believing a projection of "10% a month". However, the amazing thing about mechanical strategies is that they CAN to, some degree, be back-tested using historical data. All of a sudden, you end up with something that at least resembles 3-5 years of historical performance data... That's something you assert you can't do. The difference between your situation and his situation is truly night and day.
And when you keep talking about 200-300% annual returns (or 6-15% monthly) being remotely possible, you're really just showing lack of maturity in this industry, which any sophisticated investor will immediately pickup as a huge red flag. It's as if my doctor promised me he could cure cancer by sacrificing farm animals... I would label him a quack and move on. I could care less about hearing more about his "talents".
One unanswered question still: what is a discretionary trader to do? Is the answer that to get money, even a very small amount, one HAS to be a mechanical trader?
The only people who keep talking about those returns YOU GUYS! PLEASE STOP! I am the one saying IT CANNOT BE SUSTAINED BUT IT IS WHAT IT IS! Wow. Pardon me for being frustrated but what do you expect? I don't know what the returns will eventually be, but there are traders out there who make huge returns, it is possible. They are the 1% not the 99%, pun intended. Don't blame me for things that aren't my fault! I can't help the returns I'm getting and show maturity by continuously recognizing they have no likelihood of continuing. Please folks, it is very very frustrating. Your analogy about the doctor is ludicrous and makes no sense, although I think I know what you are getting at, it's still based on ignoring what I said and insisting on your own skewed version.

