100k per week - serious question

[SvenFoster]

Hey Mean,
if you look under the thread title. That's the easiest way to find out.

Zinga!! lol

 

[Brabed]

you can make 10% a week no bother at all..but expect that 10% a week to soon turn into -20% a week

Why would a trader 'expect' to lose?!? Expect to lose and you will. Expect to win long term and you can, anything is possible in this business. Our only limits are self- imposed.

I believe 10% per week is more than doable, with the right strategy and the correct mental state.

 

[N Rothschild]

because 10% a week would involve high risk/leverage. and that only ever ends one way

 

[Brabed]

because 10% a week would involve high risk/leverage. and that only ever ends one way

Not necessarily, if one put 3% (a conservative risk) on the line on every trade with a 1:1 RR, then all it would take is 4 of 5 winning trades per week to hit 9 - 10%

Define 'high risk'- Risk means something different to the guy who trades with a 75 - 80% accuracy than it does to the trader who has a better chance of tossing a coin.

 

[Brabed]

.....and that only ever ends one way

It does for the one who believes it.

 

[N Rothschild]

so do YOU make 10% per week?

 

[meanreversion]

NO-ONE IS MAKING 10 PCT A WEEK.

10 pct a week means turning $10,000 into $200bio in 2 years, not even Bernie Madoff managed that.

This thread gets sillier.

There is a very rare and select number of fund managers in the US who have returned 20 pct a year for 20 years, Buffett is one, there are a few other well known ones.

And yet you guys are talking about 10 pct a week..... please stop this nonsense.

 

[meanreversion]

That should be $10,000 into $200mio (not $200bio) but whatever, it's not going to happen.

 

[jazzidee]

It does for the one who believes it.

Belief and trading does not go well together. 10% per week is not possible without significant risk. 10% per month is easy without leverage and I am perfectly happy with that because I know that when the bad days come(they always do), I won't be down 10-30% percent(just 1-3 percent).

 

[Hoggums]

Not necessarily, if one put 3% (a conservative risk) on the line on every trade with a 1:1 RR, then all it would take is 4 of 5 winning trades per week to hit 9 - 10%

Define 'high risk'- Risk means something different to the guy who trades with a 75 - 80% accuracy than it does to the trader who has a better chance of tossing a coin.

I challenge you to show me a trader with 1:1 RR and 80% success rate.

Pure fantasy.

This is why most newbies fail. Unrealistic expectations about their win/lose ratios and Risk/Reward.

10% per week is 14,100% per annum compounded. Cloud cookoo land, there's simply no point in aiming pie in the sky, it serves no purpose. You'll stay on track maybe for a few months if you're lucky but eventually you'll get caught because you have no expectation or plan for dealing with unfavourable market conditions.

My advice to beginners is not to concentrate on best case scenarios - but devote more time to worst case - base your trading plan around difficult trading conditions, because you are going to experience them. Concentrate on how you are going to survive these periods. Ignore them at your peril.

 

[Adamus]

That should be $10,000 into $200mio (not $200bio) but whatever, it's not going to happen.

Have you traded gold in Zimbabwean dollars?

 

[Brabed]

Belief and trading does not go well together.

In my opinion, couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm done, didn't mean to stoke the fire, I guess I was in the mood for healthy debate this morning. A few parting comments:

I am far from a newbie. I don't discuss my trading results on trading boards, it really doesn't matter as I'm not talking about what I've done, but rather about my belief that nothing is impossible. Again, our only limits are self-imposed. This is evident in the staunch criticism of my posts, you are defending your limiting beliefs. This comment is not to slight you in any way and I believe you are all probably really good traders.

I especially like the old argument that X% per X time period is simply 'impossible', because if you did that you'd end up with $XXXXXX(big number). SO??!?? The end result does not negate the means.

Take care, good trading all and I hope I did not offend anyone because that was not my intent.

 

[wackypete2]

Lets take a different approach. I dont know anyone who continually compounds their winnings to eternity. Thats just as silly and any seasoned home gamer would remove money as a safeguard. Also most traders who use trading as sole or primary income remove their winnings or good portion thereof each week or month. So 10% per week would never actually reach 14,100% compounded annually.

Now, 10% is achievable on a per week basis. A good scalper can make this. The caveat here is highly successful scalping takes so much time, energy, and emotion to be able to continue week after week that traders burn out well before their time. I've seen it happen to great traders and I very nearly sent myself into a death spiral of sorts many years ago. So while it's possible from a a trading standpoint, it's not really probable from a human standpoint.

 

[meanreversion]

Lets take a different approach. I dont know anyone who continually compounds their winnings to eternity. Thats just as silly and any seasoned home gamer would remove money as a safeguard. Also most traders who use trading as sole or primary income remove their winnings or good portion thereof each week or month. So 10% per week would never actually reach 14,100% compounded annually.

Now, 10% is achievable on a per week basis. A good scalper can make this. The caveat here is highly successful scalping takes so much time, energy, and emotion to be able to continue week after week that traders burn out well before their time. I've seen it happen to great traders and I very nearly sent myself into a death spiral of sorts many years ago. So while it's possible from a a trading standpoint, it's not really probable from a human standpoint.

Good post.

Actually, on reflection, this thread has stimulated some lively debate and I understand where the threadstarter is going with his idea on self-imposed limitations.

As Ed Seykota said in that book which we've all read "you always get what you want from the market". I find Seykota's utterings just a little too clever for my liking, but this one has some truth in it.

As we sit behind our keyboards, we might SAY that we dream about running a hedge fund and making 10s or 100s of millions, but we don't REALLY believe it, do we. A bit like those people on Who wants to be a Millionaire who get to £32,000 and take it as it's equal to a nice car and a holiday.. they don't really want to be millionaires.

That's why I find the concept of profit targets a bit strange, i.e. I risk 1 unit to make 3, or a 3R multiple as Van Tharp calls it. Why not utilise trailing stops and once in a while make 10R.. it can happen. To impose a risk/reward ratio on the market seems flawed.. if nothing else, it will lead to scenarios such as "well if the market gets to 2.95R then starts to retrace, I will take off half the position" and so on. Nonetheless, there are many different styles in the market, and everyone needs to do what they think works.

I think the majority of us struggle with eternal self-doubt and perhaps this is what holds us back. My view is that this is a long term thing, don't expect riches overnight, just stick with the plan and hopefully one day the money will come.

 

[bedsit]

T2W - trade to win
A nice name (better than T2L)

When I mentioned importance of a positive expectancy I didn't mean for a trader to go mad with unrealistic goals.

Personally I have a set of rules: If I make more than 10% a week I take a break for at least 2 days. Similarly if I lose more than 5% a week I take a break.
Risk I take per trade is 1 - 2% max. Also one of my rules is to stop trading for the rest of the day if I have 2 losses that day.
This way I minimise stress and know about the risk involved. I think that's the only thing a trader can control (no control over price movement available as yet)

I asked about big trades (and accounts) to get some idea about trade sizes. It seems that 10 lots (1m trade) would be a reasonable amount. I should think that 100 lots (10m trade) is different (one kind member posted a record of trade sizes and there were not many trades there bigger than 10m).
So in that case it would be easier to make 10% on 100k account (or smaller one) than on 1m account IMO.

 

[Waterfield]

T2W - trade to win
A nice name (better than T2L)

Incidentally I own that domain name(www.trade2lose.com). . Aswell as www.propboards.co.uk

 

[Adamus]

I asked about big trades (and accounts) to get some idea about trade sizes. It seems that 10 lots (1m trade) would be a reasonable amount. I should think that 100 lots (10m trade) is different (one kind member posted a record of trade sizes and there were not many trades there bigger than 10m).
So in that case it would be easier to make 10% on 100k account (or smaller one) than on 1m account IMO.

Bedsit, doesn't this depend on your trading methodology? Surely if you have a methodology that is scalable, it should be just as easy whatever your bet size, up to the point where you don't have enough liquidity available anymore in the market you trade.

 

[Adamus]

Incidentally I own that domain name(www.trade2lose.com). . Aswell as www.propboards.co.uk

how about www.trade4kicks.com

trade2win though is not a serious name. it might be accurate that we on this forum are just a bunch of amateurs, but i could do without the reminder every time I log on.

 

[bedsit]

Bedsit, doesn't this depend on your trading methodology? Surely if you have a methodology that is scalable, it should be just as easy whatever your bet size, up to the point where you don't have enough liquidity available anymore in the market you trade.

Well, I don't have that sort of worries at the moment (so far as massive trades are concerned) LOL

 

[jazzidee]

In my opinion, couldn't be further from the truth.

I'm done, didn't mean to stoke the fire, I guess I was in the mood for healthy debate this morning. A few parting comments:

I am far from a newbie. I don't discuss my trading results on trading boards, it really doesn't matter as I'm not talking about what I've done, but rather about my belief that nothing is impossible. Again, our only limits are self-imposed. This is evident in the staunch criticism of my posts, you are defending your limiting beliefs. This comment is not to slight you in any way and I believe you are all probably really good traders.

I especially like the old argument that X% per X time period is simply 'impossible', because if you did that you'd end up with $XXXXXX(big number). SO??!?? The end result does not negate the means.

Take care, good trading all and I hope I did not offend anyone because that was not my intent.

What is the point of belief? Motivation? An antidote for reality? Blind Confidence? At the end of the day, belief is only an emotion that gives comfort before an event and has no purpose once the event has begun. As Mike said, "Everyone has a plan before they get hit"