Generally speaking folks that seek high win systems (that don't exist or last) are new to trading and/or under capitalised. In trading one has to have a plan B and it is in acceptance that there will be numerous losses and at times there will be consecutive ones. Yes, trading requires skill and discipline and capital as well as understanding that you aren't doing a jump onto a moving train solo, there are others on it already and want to get on and off it.
This chart shows the distribution of a series of 44 consecutive trades. The red line shows where the losing trades are, left of the line. It clearly shows that probabilities exist. I removed the x and y axis because I don't want to discuss performance. Whether you think, or are sure, that the trades are fake, or real, I don't care. I just give this information, you can do with it what you want. I am already used now to be attacked by bashers, so...
Thank you for posting. It's interesting. Some questions (which of course you're entitled to not answer): 1) Is this your typical performance, or a cherry picked sample - i.e. what does the distribution of your previous consecutive 44 trades look like? 2) Does the x-axis represent profit on a linear scale - I assume it does, but just checking? 3) Does the profit include commissions, and if not, by how much does the distribution shift to the left?
These are all trade from june. The chart of the distribution has always more or less the same shape. Profit per trade can change because that depends of the trending of the market. Unfortunatelly it is not a lineair scale. I did this on purpose to avoid that people can start to calculate. I had in past already experiences that, by being to clear, people could calculate my performance. So each bar got a different scaling. I mean first bar can be trades between 1 and 2 points, next one can be trades between 2 and 7 points, third one between 7 and 8..... If I would use a lineair scale it would look like the distribution in randomness, with the only difference that the center (highest point in the curve) would be much more to the right of 0. I hope you understand what I mean. Watch the chart added to see the shape (more or less). Net profits, so after slippage and commission. Prices of execution minus commissions. View attachment 154844 This chart is more how it looks in reality. Assymetric because right side is bigger.
Ratio is very good 44 trades with less than 10% losing trades. Profit per trade is bigger than loss per trade. That's all I can tell. But if you can calculate you already know that in losing trades I give back less than 10% of my gross profits (as profits per trade are bigger than losses per trade).
True. The problem is most of the novice losers/broker sponsor posters will claim that they are able to find trades with > 50% win rate AND reward (after commission).
If big guns struggle to achieve a rate over 50%, then that's why I am sceptical of retail traders making claims.
100% agree. High win rate system will come with big drawdown (chop is your friend) , low win rate system will come with small but high number of drawdown (trend is your friend). Nobody just talks (talk is cheap) and throw around some trivial bs math, never been backup by any statistics proof. Example, if he claims he has 70% win rate, a list of 10 to 15 real time trades with clear PT and SL will backup his claim, but he never shows any real trades and prefer to divert attention with bs statement , highly suspicious.