This system has one loss per 5364 trades

[DeltaRisk]

Uh, NO, it is as far off as I think it is, unless I am thinking wrong here. With 100K how the hell does one trade tens of millions with minimal risk?

Arb trading? Another strategy and style that I have no experience with. Oi.

Yes, PM and/or haircut will allow you that leverage. It’s not hard to understand.

I couldn’t give you a strategy without excessive risk without a PM account, it’s that simple. I’m not willing to give out a working strategy unless you’re going to help me out, It is what it is.

You could maybe trade FOP’s to arb but that’s a PM, I won’t discuss openly. You’d be taking on excessive leverage and debt if the broker decides to change margin on you.

 

[Humpy]

If you happen to have a spare million or two then only buy blue chip shares like Apple that pay dividends regularly.
Betting on Forex will probably bankrupt you.

 

[maxinger]

If you have only one loss per 5364 trades, it is a very lousy system.
Because you are actually holding on to your multiple loosing positions and hence no actual loss but paper loss.

Or perhaps you are setting you stop level extremely extremely far away
resulting in small gain but extremely high paper loss.
So set you stop loss at appropriate level.

A good trading system should have around 50% to 60% success rate.

A lousy trading system has < 25% success rate
AND > 90% success rate.

 

[Clubber Lang]

Well hell, if I had one million dollars set aside in my trading account, I could easily figure out how to trade with no losers and make profit

If you could “easily figure out how to trade with no losers” with 1MM, why can’t you do it with whatever you have in your account now?

 

[schweiz]

AND > 90% success rate.

Just make some extra losses to stay below the 90% and your problem is solved.
Or give the system to me, I don't mind trading such a lousy system.

PM:this thread was again a fake one just to generate traffic. Again an alias from surf I suppose. It is funny how people start to react to the titles without even any posting with details. Tells a lot about the people posting here on ET.

 

[DeltaRisk]

If you happen to have a spare million or two then only buy blue chip shares like Apple that pay dividends regularly.
Betting on Forex will probably bankrupt you.

I’ve made a bit of money, not on forex.
But, I worked my butt off for it.
Took quite a few years and more for it.

Economies of scale are the only reason I’m even here.

If you could “easily figure out how to trade with no losers” with 1MM, why can’t you do it with whatever you have in your account now?

It’s not as easy as you believe.

With 1mm, you can get access to many things not available to anyone with less than 100k. Clearly, that’s not going to make you profitable, but it does give you an edge.

If you’ve got 5-10, you can trade OTC products, on unfavorable terms, but you can still trade them. (I don’t mean penny stocks.)

Seriously, there are advantages to be gained.

In 2011, I’d say if you’ve got an extra $100 laying around you could trade bitcoin *wink wink*

 

[Xela]

If you have only one loss per 5364 trades, it is a very lousy system.

This is definitely right. For the reason you mention, and for other reasons, too.

A lousy trading system has < 25% success rate
AND > 90% success rate.

I agree about the principle, and about the practicalities underlying the point you're making, but I'd have gone a little bit lower for the first figure, there, myself.

 

[Slartibartfast]

This thread seems a good example of oooh... a big number! effect on forums. It says delete me on the first post but still has residual momentum.

I did an SMA cross on unirenkos once that will do similar to the thread title.

 

[kevinkdog]

This is why winning percentage is really meaningless (although psychologically could be useful), and expectancy is the important calculation. Like others, I have had systems with < 25% wins that do great, and systems with >90% wins that cost me a bunch.

 

[Slartibartfast]

This is why winning percentage is really meaningless (although psychologically could be useful), and expectancy is the important calculation. Like others, I have had systems with < 25% wins that do great, and systems with >90% wins that cost me a bunch.

Kevin speaks the truth,

A question Kevin? I recall seeing on another forum a post from a few years back. You were running a large number of different bots (60-80+) in parallel each needing 20k ish (memory may be bad) capital. Are you still going with massively parallel?

In your book/course do you have a pathway to grow from say 20k? up in some reasonable time-frame?