What do you think matters most in trading?

[themickey]

When we gamble on horses or dogs, we know many consistencies, they run, the run the same direction, the track has a certain length, we can estimate the time, we can gauge quality and conditions, we calculate the odds, we place money down and hope / expect a return.
Only the outcome we do not know ahead of time.
No different from trading.

 

[virtusa]

Every day on average, over a sufficiently long timespan, and with bearable DD, yes.
That is the normal definition of consistent "profitability".

A systematic algorithmic approach will produce a steady flow of profit over the long term (not huge as the idiotic claims you hear around from crooks or deluded people, but relatively "sure" and with bearable, adjustable DD ).

Exactly!
Unfortunatelly not many people understand what you say. As long as they have no "system" with a systematic algorithmic approach, they will never understand it. I have something similar to what you describe.

If people say that trading is gambling, they still have a long way to go to become a successful trader. We could do an experiment and throw dices to decide if we go long or short, and when to exit. And then compare the stats with trading with a systematic algorithmic approach. I am sure that the trader will beat the gambler with the dices.

 

[fullautotrading]

When we gamble on horses or dogs, we know many consistencies, they run, the run the same direction, the track has a certain length, we can estimate the time, we can gauge quality and conditions, we calculate the odds, we place money down and hope / expect a return.
Only the outcome we do not know ahead of time.
No different from trading.

There is a famous saying in this regard: the law of the hammer or Maslow's hammer

Certainly, if you can't even conceive how $$$ is printed with a consistent algorithmic approach, everything will obviously look to you like a horse race

For a casual internet chat, I can't do much else but assure you that this is not really the case. Then, of course, you can continue to see everything as a gamble.

You see an athlete doing a double backflip dismount, and you may think he is gambling his life. He might respond: Well, I have been training for the last 25 years for that.

Where is the boundary between a gamble and something carefully planned and based on objective elements?

After all, we might be "gambling" our lives away every day, in some broad sense

 

[themickey]

When you place your 'bet' on a trade can you determine with exactness what the outcome will be?
Can you say the trade will be exactly this price at this time when I sell?
No!
You do not know for certain each individual 'bet' will be a winner or loser or at what price or at what time.

 

[fullautotrading]

When you place your 'bet' on a trade can you determine with exactness what the outcome will be?
Can you say the trade will be exactly this price at this time when I sell?
No!
You do not know for certain each individual 'bet' will be a winner or loser or at what price or at what time.

Your limit is that you do not know what I do in particular or, in general, how far human imagination can reach in this area with decades of hard work.

I will only tell you this. In my approach, there are no "trades" at all

So just imagine how far you can be from conceiving what I may be doing if you start talking of "winning" and "losing" trades, which from my personal point of view are plain naive nonsense...

If you start talking of "winners" or "losers" of course you do have gambles in mind... and you are already headed the wrong way


PS.
If you are curious, and in case you have missed it, I have an ongoing journal here on ET, I use for "public demonstrations":
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...-and-market-drift.364633/page-51#post-5846504
(This requires good capital, nothing good over there for small funds.)

 

[themickey]

Your limit is that you do not know what I do in particular or, in general, how far human imagination can reach in this area with decades of hard work.
I will only tell you this. In my approach, there are no "trades" at all
So just imagine how far you can be from conceiving what I may be doing if you start talking of "winning" and "losing" trades, which from my personal point of view are plain naive nonsense...
If you start talking of "winners" or "losers" of course you do have gambles in mind... and you are already headed the wrong way
PS.
If you are curious, and in case you have missed it, I have an ongoing journal here on ET, I use for "public demonstrations":
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...-and-market-drift.364633/page-51#post-5846504
(This requires good capital, nothing good over there for small funds.)

I can only reply this way; I'm a retail trader who only trades stocks, long.
I have basically zero knowledge of other forms of trading.
Excuse my ignorance, when you mention "no trades at all"...., "....may be doing if you start talking of "winning" and "losing" trades, which from my personal point of view are plain naive nonsense... "

 

[fullautotrading]

I can only reply this way; I'm a retail trader who only trades stocks, long.
I have basically zero knowledge of other forms of trading.
Excuse my ignorance, when you mention "no trades at all"...., "....may be doing if you start talking of "winning" and "losing" trades, which from my personal point of view are plain naive nonsense... "

I get the sarcasm but keep in mind that it's just a never-ending journey, themickey. We all have started and transited somewhere and believed things... that is why I strongly believe that anyone has to do his own journey, and usually, it's of not much use to try to change anyone's mind or approach. It's just a very slow process that takes a long time...

From naive "trades" to the conception of a continuous flow of long/short hedging orders, algorithmically controlled, and a stop recovery mechanism, there is quite a journey to do...

The only thing I can do is provocatively plant the "seed of doubt" against all the nonsense perpetuated by the herd

PS. btw, I saw your journal about trading ASX

 

[Handle123]

Been trading since 1978, for myself it never been about the money, I think most humans are dreamers first than learn ways how not to lose so often or so large. Like in life, the complicated shit you have to learn is pushed on back burner for years like stats, risk management and accuracy. Pushing back causes accounts to vanish.

I did it first by learning long term trading stocks, then scalping/long term commodities/futures. Then directional stock option credit spreads and always continuing education on long term commodities. As years turn to decades, I have dropped long term stocks, greatly reduced scalping index and energy futures, plowing more into long term commodities and credit spreads.

Being in my late 60's, it still never been bout the money, it is about execution perfectly through mostly automation and some manual.

Most forget that trading is a business, if you fail, it was caused by horrible management.

Larger the account, tougher to get options to hedge, have to think outside the norms to hedge.

 

[ironchef]

It is just what I observe, in real trading, with my approach and strategy.

Of course, if you think it "should" not be so you are free to continue having your opinion. I am just reporting what for me is a fact (I repeat, for the specific approach I use, which relies on portfolio margin).

It really does not change anything for me if anyone has a different "opinion" of what, according to his abstract view, should happen.

I don't have any opinion.

I am just curious why $10MM can do so much better than $2MM.

As a a retail trading my own money, I have a discretionary approach, not systematic computer driven auto trades. My system does have positive expectancy but the rate of return is independent of the size of my trades.

If a larger amount inherently can produce better results, I can add more money into the account.

Thank you for your time.

 

[fullautotrading]

I don't have any opinion.

I am just curious why $10MM can do so much better than $2MM.

As a a retail trading my own money, I have a discretionary approach, not systematic computer driven auto trades. My system does have positive expectancy but the rate of return is independent of the size of my trades.

If a larger amount inherently can produce better results, I can add more money into the account.

Thank you for your time.

I think I have already answered your question ironchef.

Which part, in particular, of the reply was not clear?

First of all, I did not say that of "rate of return is independent of the size of my trades". Again you are reasoning in terms of fixed trades. That is you are projecting your own idea of trading. While I do not even use the concept of "trade".

If you are sitting at a poker table and have 10 bucks in your pocket, while your opponent has 1MM, who is going to lose at the end of the day?