raising funds

Quote from traderwann:

Thank you for the replies in this thread. All prop firms I've talked to want a deposit that I could just put in my own retail futures account. It seems there's no benefit, some have even said this to me straight out. Some have said they'd rather not take a percentage cut of my earnings since I should just trade on my own (as if it would be unfair to help me in this situation). Ooook. People say all kinds of stuff.

I was expecting that since props hire newbies, one of them might see less risk here. I managed to find one individual who does this kind of thing and the response was the proposed ROI isn't good enough. I almost choked, but whatever, people say all kinds of stuff.
More...

I thought that everyone made it pretty clear that a prop firm would still require you to have your own money on deposit. The difference is that they will allow you to leverage that capital more heavily. What was being suggested was a 10X leverage. You deposit $10K and they let you trade at $100K. Obviously, they aren't going to let you lose more than your own $10K, so your strategy cannot allow a 10% drawdown.


I've heard stories of making 100s of calls a day soliciting funds. I've done cold calling, that's not what I'm about to do with my time. The results have continued for 30 trading days now. I know I'm crazy, but there's this thing called a free market, where people exchange skills and capital. I know it's nuts, like lunatic asylum material, but I thought we had enough of a free market where this can happen.
More...

The breakdown in your free market is that there is no reasonable way for someone to verify that you have the skills to exchange for their capital. That is precisely what a performance history is for. You seem to think that 30 trading days is a long history. The free market has decided that the required performance history is something closer to 500-750 trading days. You're looking for a way to get around a vetting process that was established by the actual free market. That is not going to be easy.

As I suggested before, it is probably going to take you more time to find a stranger than it would to simply go the conventional route.
 
Quote from Epic:
I thought that everyone made it pretty clear that a prop firm would still require you to have your own money on deposit.
More...
Sorry, I thought it was pretty clear that some prop firms do not require a deposit. My bad for assuming that would be considered. Or is it? I also thought it clear that I was talking about futures prop vs retail NOT stocks prop vs retail. My bad. Or is it? Sorry, but when you start off saying "I thought it was pretty clear" then I assume it is fair to respond similarly?

The breakdown in your free market is that there is no reasonable way for someone to verify that you have the skills to exchange for their capital. That is precisely what a performance history is for. You seem to think that 30 trading days is a long history. The free market has decided that the required performance history is something closer to 500-750 trading days. You're looking for a way to get around a vetting process that was established by the actual free market. That is not going to be easy.As I suggested before, it is probably going to take you more time to find a stranger than it would to simply go the conventional route.
More...
Well this certainly hits the nail on the head: what is a free market? free for who and to achieve what? on a scale of 1 - 10 how 'free' is the current status quo compared to the ideal and how would that change your analysis of the above? what factors affect how free a market is, again in perspective of for who and to achieve what and perhaps most importantly: in what priority? i don't think the depth of my statement about a free market is fully realized

There is most certainly a "reasonable" way to determine when someone can make their first trade based on a tested strategy. It happens every day. You quote numbers as if they are universal, while that is true in many situations, it is not universal.

I would like to challenge anyone who thinks that simulating is "EASIER" and "NOT REAL" to just go ahead and simulate consistent results on par with mine for 30 trading days. It should be no problem IF all the statements here about simulation are true. It's easy, it's not real, anyone can do it, there is no VALUE in the results because YOU can do it, your BROTHER can do it, ANYONE can. It's a known fact that any trader who makes xx% can multiply their results, without any other changes, by a factor of what percent when simulating? Further, any number one can come up with I suggest dividing my ROI by the inverse for perspective.

If not possible, how does that change the idea that there is no reasonable way for anyone to take measured risk:reward without 2+ years of live trading history?

If not possible, you can't logically have it both ways and something has to give for anything to make sense, to fit reality as it could be not as it currently being made by choice. Consider the impact of stubborn belief systems on what a free market is - not just in this case but very generalized. This is certainly one factor affecting a free market that is not discussed compared to capital structures, for example.
 
Quote from traderwann:

Sorry, I thought it was pretty clear that some prop firms do not require a deposit. My bad for assuming that would be considered. Or is it? I also thought it clear that I was talking about futures prop vs retail NOT stocks prop vs retail. My bad. Or is it? Sorry, but when you start off saying "I thought it was pretty clear" then I assume it is fair to respond similarly?

Well this certainly hits the nail on the head: what is a free market? free for who and to achieve what? on a scale of 1 - 10 how 'free' is the current status quo compared to the ideal and how would that change your analysis of the above? what factors affect how free a market is, again in perspective of for who and to achieve what and perhaps most importantly: in what priority? i don't think the depth of my statement about a free market is fully realized

There is most certainly a "reasonable" way to determine when someone can make their first trade based on a tested strategy. It happens every day. You quote numbers as if they are universal, while that is true in many situations, it is not universal.

I would like to challenge anyone who thinks that simulating is "EASIER" and "NOT REAL" to just go ahead and simulate consistent results on par with mine for 30 trading days. It should be no problem IF all the statements here about simulation are true. It's easy, it's not real, anyone can do it, there is no VALUE in the results because YOU can do it, your BROTHER can do it, ANYONE can. It's a known fact that any trader who makes xx% can multiply their results, without any other changes, by a factor of what percent when simulating? Further, any number one can come up with I suggest dividing my ROI by the inverse for perspective.

If not possible, how does that change the idea that there is no reasonable way for anyone to take measured risk:reward without 2+ years of live trading history?

If not possible, you can't logically have it both ways and something has to give for anything to make sense, to fit reality as it could be not as it currently being made by choice. Consider the impact of stubborn belief systems on what a free market is - not just in this case but very generalized. This is certainly one factor affecting a free market that is not discussed compared to capital structures, for example.
More...

Earth to traderwann...no one cares about your simulated results. They are worthless as many, many people here have pointed out to you. Trade your own money or find something else to do.

/end of thread
 
yo epic or captain whatever

i saw your post before you deleted it, you called me condescending but YOU were the one who started off with the "i thought it was clear stuff", if there is anything "condescending" after i pointed that out, please educate me, i re-read my message and can't see it

just wanted to know you were busted, i wouldn't have said anything if you didn't delete the post (probably), but at least i know for sure now
 
Quote from western:
Earth to traderwann...no one cares about your simulated results. They are worthless as many, many people here have pointed out to you. Trade your own money or find something else to do.
More...
Can you possibly IGNORE and AVOID most of the points I've raised any more clearly? Are you a politician? Sigh, this isn't why I hesitated to post originally but it is another entirely good reason: the inability to comprehend written english.
 
Quote from western:
your simulated results. They are worthless as many, many people here have pointed out to you.
More...
If you wish to participate in a productive conversation, be helpful, and pro-free market can you please respond to the following:

I would like to challenge anyone who thinks that simulating is "EASIER" and "NOT REAL" to just go ahead and simulate consistent results on par with mine for 30 trading days. It should be no problem IF all the statements here about simulation are true. It's easy, it's not real, anyone can do it, there is no VALUE in the results (i.e. no one cares as just said) because YOU can do it, your BROTHER can do it, ANYONE can ... right? Maybe not, maybe the statements aren't fully grounded in reality.

THE POINT, is that a good trader will simulate results approximate to their real results REGARDLESS of which come first. I challenge anyone to disprove it. Show me any successful trader who can "magically" double their results in simulation or anything similar. No offense, but it is difficult to accept the opinion of one who can't defend their opinion.
 
Quote from heech:

For those still trying to help this guy... why? I can't think of a less deserving candidate.
More...

Just because you've been running your own fund and been raising capital for a long time doesn't mean you know more than a guy whose been paper trading for 30 days!
 
Martinghoul, sle and heech have all asked (and answered) important questions.

30 days is completely insignificant, the longer the test period the better. Even anything less than 2-3 years is fairly insignificant if the test period doesn't include different market conditions (low volatility as in 2004; panic selling with high volatility like we saw in 2008). If you are paper trading then no one serious would listen to you, unless you are conman-level charismatic as execution is always a key part to any strategy. The way forward is to commit your own money and just build a track record.
 
Quote from oilfxpro:

Back tests are pretty useless cause there is no psychology tested i.e discipline ,fear ,greed , natural reaction to losses and many other personality traits of the individual. 20 % is trading and 80 % is psychology , so who is going to invest based on 20 % testing. The 80 % gets tested only with real money.
More...

Obviously you missed the whole point of systematic trading. You have to trust and execute the system blindly, even when your intuition ("psychology") is telling you different. You only stop when your risk levels are exceeded by a wide margin and if you can't stomach the drawdowns in simulation, you shouldn't trade it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top