what is the maximum mathematically possible daily profit

[virtusa]

I will try this one. Supposing that "var" is the tradable (in a way that slippage and other factors can be disregarded) total percentual variaton of price in a day, the maximum percentual daily profit is given by the formula:
((e^log_2((var*500/100)+1))-1)*100
It seems to show that at maximum leverage is better get 2 times x% profits than 2x% profit at once, and even better 4 times 0.5x% profits, and so on, but I may be wrong.

So basically what you calculate has no value. What's then the use of it?
You calculate something but you don't know if it is even right???

When I started to trade a few decades ago, I watched the market move and tried to find a way to take every wave. Knowing the theoretical mathematical profit I could take was irrelevant. The PRACTICAL mathematical profit was relevant.
In reality you are limited in many ways by different things when trading. So REALITY should be used as a basis to build a system. Not the theoretical possibilities.

I see theoretical potential as as a dream.
I see practical potential as as a reality.
And reality is what counts, not dreams.
Practical= theoretical reduced to reality.

 

[tyrion]

So basically what you calculate has no value. What's then the use of it?
You calculate something but you don't know if it is even right???

When I started to trade a few decades ago, I watched the market move and tried to find a way to take every wave. Knowing the theoretical mathematical profit I could take was irrelevant. The PRACTICAL mathematical profit was relevant.
In reality you are limited in many ways by different things when trading. So REALITY should be used as a basis to build a system. Not the theoretical possibilities.

I see theoretical potential as as a dream.
I see practical potential as as a reality.
And reality is what counts, not dreams.
Practical= theoretical reduced to reality.

You like to think you are practical, but think about it rationally: you can’t even answer, or try to answer, a direct and clear question stated by the OP!

You say the “practical way” is the important thing but don’t provide any idea of a “practical way”, and much less provide any formula or proof to support your idea, so you are being even more theoretical or philosophical than me!

It’s not wrong that the reality is important, but this is another question, one that you are not answering - and not even questioning! So what’s the value of your post?

 

[wmwmw]

You like to think you are practical, but think about it rationally: you can’t even answer, or try to answer, a direct and clear question stated by the OP!

You say the “practical way” is the important thing but don’t provide any idea of a “practical way”, and much less provide any formula or proof to support your idea, so you are being even more theoretical or philosophical than me!

It’s not wrong that the reality is important, but this is another question, one that you are not answering - and not even questioning! So what’s the value of your post?

What the hell is "formula or proof to support your idea of practical way"?
He trades everyday, that is the practical way.
Only layman or newbie can't see this.
It is like a fool goes to a casino and dreams what is the mathematical value that he wagers 1000 times and wins every one of his bets.
When he is told it is not practical, he then says" you can't provide a formula or proof to support your idea of a practical way".
Well, the way all the gamblers do in the casino is the practical way.

 

[tyrion]

What the hell is "formula or proof to support your idea"?
He trades everyday, that is the practical way.
Only layman or newbie can't see this.
It is like a fool goes to a casino and dream what is the mathematical value that he wagers 1000 times and wins every one of his bets.
When he is told it is not practical, he then say " you can't provide a formula or proof to support your idea of a practical way".

The fool is the one that DOES NOT calculate or estimate his probabilities. In the case of the casino, it’s easy to tell him it’s not practical and provide an exact value of his probabilities depending on the kind of bet, and that would be a “formula or proof to support your idea”. So your analogy is a bad one.

And a badge of “practical trader everyday” does not answer the question posted by OP and does not contribute in any other “practical” aspect to the reader.

 

[wmwmw]

Did you calculate the probability that one can catch all the market moves on a day?
It is 1/100000000000 of one winning every bet of 1000 times wagers in a casino.
Either you are a fool or a layman knowing nothing about trading.

Only a layman or a fool will ask for a"formula or proof to support your idea of practical way"

 

[tyrion]

Did you calculate the probability that one can catch all the market moves on a day?
It is 1/100000000000 of one winning every bet of 1000 times wagers in a casino.
Either you are a fool or a layman knowing nothing about trading.

You are right, it’s certainly impossible to do, but it’s possible to provide an answer to the OP’s question.

And it’s worse than catching all the markets moves on a day: it’s doing this while keeping maximum leverage. Of course this is only a theoretical question that could lead to interesting or maybe even useful discussions if the irrationally practical people would allow it.

 

[newwurldmn]

You are right, it’s certainly impossible to do, but it’s possible to provide an answer to the OP’s question.

And it’s worse than catching all the markets moves on a day: it’s doing this while keeping maximum leverage. Of course this is only a theoretical question that could lead to interesting or maybe even useful discussions if the irrationally practical people would allow it.

So answer it and explain how the solution is useful to anything. I would be curious as I certainly don’t understand the point of this thread.

 

[tyrion]

So answer it and explain how the solution is useful to anything. I would be curious as I certainly don’t understand the point of this thread.

I don’t know the OP’s intention, but in my first answer I speculated a possible usefulness: it may show that it is maybe better to try to catch two small moves, keeping leverage, than a bigger one of the same size of the 2 small, everything else constant (including stop loss). But as I already wrote in the beginning, I am not sure about it, maybe the “practical traders everyday” could illuminate better this point.

 

[newwurldmn]

I don’t know the OP’s intention, but in my first answer I speculated a possible usefulness: it may show that it is maybe better to try to catch two small moves, keeping leverage, than a bigger one of the same size of the 2 small, everything else constant (including stop loss). But as I already wrote in the beginning, I am not sure about it, maybe the practical traders could illuminate better this point.

If you aren’t sure then you shouldn’t be attacking others who challenge the purpose of this train wreck of a thread.

There is substantial value in understanding what your slippage could be. But a philosophical pnl is so far from that it would be like measuring the distance from New York to Newark by triangulating their relative distances to Pluto.

 

[SunTrader]

I know its difficult to accept that it can be solved. There is an entire industry of successful traders. You sound silly.

No there isn't. There is an entire industry filled with some successful traders.

And obviously at least one pretender.