With a 55% winrate to a 1:1 risk basis, I am surprised you earn a profit, doesn't the spread consume to your trades?Originally Posted by ;
With a 55% winrate to a 1:1 risk basis, I am surprised you earn a profit, doesn't the spread consume to your trades?Originally Posted by ;
I believe that goal is attainable. Simply work on honing your advantage.
It is important that we as trader focus on operating within the market to attain our goals, as opposed to imposing our will on it. Either your trading reaches your equity expansion goal or not.
Hi Hmsr,Originally Posted by ;
Great question, apologies for not being clearer first time: the figures quoted are net of spread and costs. And the spread on my trading isn't so bad, my customary initial profit taking target is c.15-20x the spread.
A 55% gain rate is greater than enough so long as you buy it consistently and do not let winners get from you, the risk control is very important. Think of it over 100 transactions: 55 winners, 45 losers, so 10 web winners. In my ordinary Ris 1:1 and that I risk a level 1 percent of this account per trade, then I create 10% yield on the account each 100 trades. If I create several hundred transactions in a year I can make a decent yield on the account fairly comfortably. And with all these transactions, the law of large numbers gives me a pretty smooth equity curve.
if youré consistent, even Goldman would hire u brother. .Originally Posted by ;
Great job on your very mechanical egy. I in fact am delving into s like yours, and I have discovered egies with winrates above 60% as well as 90 percent in one instance with 1:1 RR, depending on the time period tested. Proceed enough, and things start to get bad, I assume the exact same applies going forward. I ask you, how are you sure that you are 55% winrate will maintain. Do you not fear your egies skills will dissipate down to 50%?Originally Posted by ;
Hi Hmsr,Originally Posted by ;
Today you're asking some very penetrating questions! But they're fair so I#8217;ll do my best to reply.
First, it's not a mechanical egy, I'm a purely discretionary trader. I simply don#8217;t even have it in me, with regard to personal pscyhe, to mechanically follow a method. However don#8217;t assume that as a typical negative on mechanical apparatus, it#8217;s only me.
In terms of egies holding up over the long haul, you're right, most don#8217;t. In my early days I dreamed up and tested a high number of egies and, sadly but predictably, not one of them continued a thorough test over many time periods and multiple markets. I will #8217;t even let you know how often I thought I had found the holy grail just for the subsequent testing signs to dash my hopes! This fact is what led me to take a technique that had a far more modest and marginal advantage and rather work hard through practice and experience to make that advantage consistent and durable.
Currently, at long last, to answer your central question: I don't worry it'll slide since I have been doing it for quite a while now - many years, daily, thousands of transactions - and that I manage to constantly hold my trade success rate in the 55-60% range without compromising either R:R or risk control. I also see that I'm getting gradually better with time, my trading is simpler, more natural and less stressful than it was previously.
Of course, I cannot guarantee it'll continue forever but if it happen that the decline in outcomes will provide me warning enough to stop and think anew. I don#8217;t really be concerned about this too much since I took a great deal of trouble to choose a method that I think is based on the fundamental nature of markets, the character of how prices move. Unless markets stop being markets I think my method is lasting across all liquid, freely traded, busy markets. Too many methods I've researched and seen have just been great in some market conditions, not applicable. I agree once more with your statement on this and that I resolved to pick something which might be used at all times in all states because I would like consistent yields to earn a living at this.
One last thing to make: I actually don#8217;t even believe the precise method is that important, it just needs to be not obviously faulty. I'm continually surprised about how many I seenigeriaforextradingwhich are just gloomy, certain to fail eventually. Assuming you have some sensible, the advantage comes out of you, not the procedure. The unpleasant reality is that pretty much all methods are extremely marginal, you have to take something and squeeze a constant advantage out of it by hard work and accumulated practice. You make the difference, not the method, I'm pretty convinced of this now.
Anyhow, hope that helps, good luck!