It's better for a trader to experience lots of loss. Because that's what an experienced trader means. Wouldn't you feel more confident (in a plane) with a pilote that experienced lots of turbulence rather than none ? You're gonna lose, handle them, cause you have to land those passengers on a safe ground.
Technical analysis is fantastic, BUT, you won't learn it from a thin paperback on Amazon or merely drawing support and resistance lines. An in depth study of this book should be able to gives you some IDEAS that you can work on and eventually perhaps develop something of your own:
How long's a while? Many have said it took 2, 3, 5 or even 10 years to become profitable. TA seems useless to you now, because by the sound of it you're a long way off mastering it. IMO, if you want to trade short term--that is holding positions for minutes, hours or a few days--then technical analysis is a must. S/R, trendlines, candlesticks (and more specifically what they represent) and patterns (and what they represent) are all useful tools which you shouldn't abandon. It is debatable whether you should be using indicators - the consensus has been if you must, then stick to just one indicator and get used to it - it doesn't matter which one. Understanding how fundamentals affect the value of a stock over longer timeframes could give you an edge, but poor application of fundamental analysis could, equally erode your technical edge: using both can lead to conflicting signals. Again, IMO, fundamentals can be useful in determining the magnitude of a move that occurs over weeks or months, but won't help you time your entries and exits. Additionally, news about changes in fundamentals can act as a catalyst, which can be exploited. Trading's difficult because of the large degree of randomness, and therefore uncertainty. High frequency randomness, on top of medium frequency randomness, on top of lower frequency randomness, over all timeframes. It's no wonder it seems almost impossible to grasp at first. The opportunities are there, every day, but you'll need to study, and then study some more (and some more) before you'll be able to recognize the setups that are worth betting on. Though, it won't be plain sailing from there, as you'll always need to manage the randomness (the risk). Think carefully about your criteria for getting into (holding / exiting) a position. If price is at S/R, then why would you bet on price breaking out vs reversing or going sideways? And even if the probabilities are in your favor of, say a breakout, is there much potential for a decent sized move? How many factors support your idea and how many factors contradict your idea? And how valid / significant are those factors - is your model / hypothesis really representative of reality? Jumping into the markets too soon will lead to frustration. You've asked a specific question, which is a step in the right direction, but there a probably more pertinent questions that you should seek answers to. How about starting another thread, such as: "I'm new to trading, what is the most pertinent question I should ask?"
In my humble opinion, you should forget all indicators and signals and other systems with cute names. -- and instead...look at the overall big picture...of why the market (Dow, S&P 500) goes up, or goes down, or goes flat...and why. Step away from your micro world or viewpoint...and see things from a greater horizon. And soon, things will start to kind of make sense. ...just observing the daily charts of those macro indexes...will all start to make sense, of why it moves...the way it moves.
1) This dude has 2 posts to his good name. Clearly, he made a new handle just to create this thread to bash TA yet again. And who has been doing that all along for the last 12 months? 2) There's a big problem here at ET. There are too many damn GURUS and, equally, there are too many damn VIGILANTES!
%% Good points except commies tend to shoot each other a lot+ lie like a persian rug; .As far as oil goes, the russian bear may live its name.LOL Mr Putin calls a US stock bear market- '' a failure in capitalism '' Let us see if he calls a russian bear market in oil a commie '' failure?? ''
Aha. But the problem is the gap between ideals and reality. I wouldn't say that the United States embody what's called Capitalism. The same for Russia and Communism. They can tend toward their proper ideal. But even if every road leads to Rome doesn't mean they're the same ! In addition, there are lots of variant that belong to every ideal. Hayek has differents idea about Capitalism than Friedman ... So those bear markets may indicate a failure But I wouldn't use them as a proof to debunk ideologies ...