Why 3%, why not 30% per day? Since we are talking completely made up numbers. The only ones making consistent numbers without fail are HFT companies and some banks/funds and they do not compete in the same field or have an arsenal of hundreds/thousands of traders doing very different strategies with low to no correlation. People here who claim it's possible, could you demonstrate real life results - years of consistently making at least 3%, without fail (I do mean not a single day below threshold). If you can't then this discussion is meaningless as all of us can talk about theoretical scenarios.
You misunderstand. The OP has never been able to do this. Therefore, for him, its just hypothetical and just curiosity about the math results if someone was able to do such with just $100 dollars...100 consecutive trading days...3% each trading day...without fail. The other issue was the ability to compound if such were to occur beyond one year. The OP did not say beyond year but others showed up and changed the numbers via extending the hypothesis beyond one year. Most traders are not able to compound due to realistic reasons (e.g. they have living expenses, taxes to pay and so on). Simply, if they make 3% every trading day...much of that money will not be part of the compounding math beyond a year unless the trader is in an unusual financial situation to allow for such to occur beyond one year and one of those things would involve ignoring your taxes (don't pay). That's why its just hypothetical and just fun math to play around with but not a realistic goal to try to achieve. Therefore, he can pull out his calculator and is able to do such on paper only. For example, I knew someone that was on a winning streak (no losing trading days) for 21 trading days. He played around with the math of a hypothetical situation if such continued for one year. He started to think about how much money he would have by the end of the year and a big smile came over his face. I reminded him to do the math again but this time include the fact he had a wife, two kids, bills to pay. He actually re-did the math of compounding and he wasn't smiling as much afterwards. That's reality...we gotta live and it ain't cheap. P.S. If you're living at home with mom and pop and they pay all the bills for you or you have a sugar mama/papa that pays all your bills. Those compounding numbers may become a reality if such a financial arrangement continue beyond one year.
Good to hear you. For example, suppose annual living expense is 30K and makes 20% compounded with seed of 200K. Then we can adjust the living expense, such as 40K-30K=10K, which means annual saving(?) rate equal to 5%. Buf this is still a lot better than savings in a bank. Of course we should carefully consider annual commission and 1040 tax too.
Overall, stock market is zero-sum after the index. In the long run, most money goes to tax and commission by frequent trader, as well as his living expense. That is why 95%(?) of frequent traders are eventually loser which is true in most country. Therefore we should examine profit rate for 1 year, 5 year, 30 years, .... with paper trading.
Yes, exactly...that's more like the reality of the math. Include more reality into the math and the compounding numbers change dramatically in comparison to the compounding without the reality of every day living. At some point in the game, a profitable trader needs to realize he/she needs to make as much money as possible and then call it quits or retire or become more business like and the money they've made already...it starts to pay them dividends sort'uv speak before that zero-sum stuff kicks in. Seriously, pretend you made 650k this year and you wanted to buy a house. First you pay your bills, pay your taxes and the left over you buy a house. That money is out of the market and being used...no longer part of any kind'uv hypothetical situation, not part of any zero-sum discussions and so on. Its gone except for any money you have remaining in the markets and still being traded. Not sure how he could do such nor do I know him to know if he's able to do such if he knew how to do such. For example, I don't know you. Therefore, I don't know if you're able to do such. If that answer is disclosed by someone, I'm sure we all will run out there and do it.
For example, let annual 20% trading logic is found at his discretion. At least 10 years of data is required to be convinced, with 1.2^10 = 6.191736 =6.2 times. For Buffet case, 1.2^50 = 9100.438 times, if his statement is true.
wrbtrader : I did not think of the daily living expenses to be included! And then the taxes ( till payments can be deferred) . Also, can't his wife work, so that he could compound? Now, I am more interested on the trading aspect of it: how the person could get such winning streaks, AND returns?
Buffet : it took him 20 years to make his first million, starting age 11 Now: why 10 years on backtesting? how many trades does it correspond to? how long is each winning trade is held on average?