I am certain there are many that do well here at ET with their trades. A lot of time goes into getting to a certain level deemed successful. In my experience, most at ET trade "setups" or do intra-day scalping. So this poll is to see how many have increased their contract amount as equity has grown through the years. <b>Please only vote IF you are now profitable over the years.</b> <BR>⢠YES - I have been profitable these past few years and I have increased proportionally the amount of contracts traded as my account equity has grown. <BR>⢠NO - I have been profitable these past few years and I have NOT increased proportionally the amount of contracts traded as my account equity has grown. Please comment if you would like to share your successful experience. For instance, has the increase in contracts continued to produce a similar percent return and has that compounded in your account to massive gains? After all, if one successfully trades a return with 1 contract in year 1. By duplicating the result with a linear increase in contracts - by year 3 massive gains can be realized. Unless trade "setup(s)" are still quite uncertain. . .relegating the growth to mere income, quite static in comparison.
Thank you. Now we are getting somewhere. A total of (4) have voted - all apparently have not (yet) had confidence compelling them to proportionally increase contract amount with equity growth. I'll try to discuss this later - after perhaps more votes. You see "setup(s)" may be like stocks or the market is to many, many many people - a crapshoot (gambling). You test things out a bit, they may work and continue to work for a while - until things somehow change. Like gambling you just back off and test the waters at some further juncture. NEVER growing say 20k to 100k and then trying to jump that to 1M. Better just to stay small and take a bit here and there when you can. The reason is the "edge" cannot be traded across the total market picture or even the majority of <i>known</i> snapshots. When it works. . .often one may not even really know why. Not really an "edge". pay$ense
Perhaps I need to create a picture to better show what I mean. Take an account with 50k after learning how to profitably trade. Perhaps said person is independently wealthy - does not work a day job, but trades. 50k is play money with a healthy enough cushion to absorb a *bad* period. He/she "scalps" and on any given year may <i>make</i> 10k, 20k, or 30k. Well enough and "happy" and I can produce a graph to show this *performance*. Take an entirely different person with same scenario that has a 65% CAGR strategy and containment of DD periods at say 20%. In same time-frame suppose said person utilizes <b><i>compounding</i></b> the CAGR or "reinvesting" the profits (increase of contract exposure proportional to gains in equity) to produce an entirely different result. Perhaps I need to produce a graphic chart or picture to compare the two possible scenarios. <b>Meanwhile, <i>I hope more vote.</i></b> p$
OK no more have voted. Try this one on for size. Let's say one is determined to become a successful trader. This will put them in the top few percent of all that attempt this. Then they come to ET and look for a shortcut to perhaps allow for the elite to share with or mentor them. Then of these they realize they might just end up with a short-term approach giving sporadic, but overall "successful" gains. I can share more. . .but take the bull by the horns and VOTE!
Well it is Saturday -- perhaps more intra-day traders can place a vote. Let us know for certain how most "elite" traders manage money. Compounded or linear - gives the rest of us something to shoot for. pay$ :eek: