1) what difference does it make if I have been using it for 30 days or 30 years? 2) I sweep my account after everytrade, so the only drawdown that matters is 100%, and even then I will still have a profit if I have doubled my money 3) sometimes it takes a while, the only thing that matters is if I beating an alternative 4) no
No you dont, say you bought during those NQ levels we never saw again ? How about during SP500 1500s, etc. Say you shorted somewhere in the 600s in SP500. Even if you rollover, after several rollovers your miniscule potential gain begins to evaporate due to commissions. I could go on and on and on but...... What you posted is very stupid. This must be one of those 99% bullshit posts because you cannot possibly be this stupid, I know you arent.
you seem so sure of yourself what makes you so sure that if I hit one of those unfortunate entries I will not already have swept 100 or 200% or more? so all I will be risking is my original account, and I can lose all of that and still show a profit
well, let me just ask you, what is more likely, to hit a one point target or lose 100% of my account on just one trade?
How big is this "account"? Is this a long or short trade (makes a difference)? Are you placing the trades randomly or are you a poor trader who tends to buy tops and sell bottoms? I mean, this question has so many variables that there is no telling WHAT is more likely. Although, if you are saying generally which is more likely than yes one point is more likely but then again why does this matter. It only takes one trade that doesn't retrace and continues to run in the opposite direction to wipe you out. So, it's clearly not a realistic nor smart strategy. I'm quite sure you know this but are just fucking around
you are right, it only takes one trade. Get two or three of them in a year and it could be quite substantial. and no, I'm not fucking around, this was the strategy that turned me profitable.