There might be a little bit of truth in what you're saying. But as Ted Lasso says (and Walt Whitman said), "Be curious, not judgmental."
Okay. Using that definition I would agree of course because there's always risk associated with trading and the outcome of any single trade is outside your control. However, if you have an edge, you know that over the long run you will get ahead assuming your bet size is properly sized such that you don't run the risk of ruin on a normal losing streak. I'm pretty sure that Relentless didn't have your definition in mind when he was talking about printing money, so it seems like a lot of discussion in this thread and elsewhere simply comes from misunderstandings. That said, there are plenty of retail traders who have done exceptionally well trading both index futures and other financial instruments.
You could do well and there are some non-pros (who don’t trade OPM) who made very well out of trading, but there are not many of them and these traders have likely eased their their risk strategies substantially to achieve this. Most of us would risk 2-5% of trading capital, to return similar % of equity in higher winning rate methods or more in lower win methods. So it basically becomes a job of making and losing money with an objective to make a solid return by year end. So it will never be a steep curve. Yes, you could argue that you could gradually compound returns and increase capital at risk to then profit from a greater return, but if you hit a streak of losing trades, you know what happens. Nobody can ensure in advance the flow of wins and losses.
Well, of course. I didn't even realize this was debatable. Successful or very successful trading is definitely for the few. Only the snake oil sellers and vendors would have anyone believe otherwise... The best choice for most would be to not trade. No money risk. No money lost. Easy. But there is no doubt in my mind that the riddle of the market can be solved and that for those who do so it can be very, very profitable with the losses small and the wins big. Consistently.
I am yet to meet such traders. What is consistent in your view, what win rate assuming what r:r ratio?
Like a lot of traders I cut my trading teeth on using things like MA's, basic RSI & Stochastics, etc till I found through blood, sweat and tears, AKA losing, most years that price is really all there is - unadulterated in any way. OHLC especially open and close. I also apply things like Elliott Wave, price retracements, projections and expansions but where price exactly traded in the past is most important. Not a pseudo price it may or may not have traded. I know the 200 is important to many on the street so I look at it occasionally for that reason only. This is what I see currently on weekly chart (note wave 5 of 5 projected low at bottom). TWT if it comes to be:-
I think that's an interesting question and one I've been pondering myself lately, but maybe it's worth an own thread and not discussing here? What is consistency? When are you consistent? Since I started trading again I've had 25 winning days and 10 losing days. 2 of those winning days were green gross, but slightly red after commissions. I've made money 6 out of 8 weeks. One of the weeks was only slightly red while the other one was a larger loss. My largest losses came from silly and undisciplined trading. Once, I jumped out of bed and started trading the night session. Another time I started trading the morning session before heading to work and barely being awake. I even doubled down on a loss and lost on that one as well. Just stupid really and I got what I deserved. So, I'd say there is some consistency in my trading, but it's a short sample size and I won't read too much into it. The most important is how much you make when you're right and how little you lose when you're wrong, though. Which is why I don't read too much into % win rate both on a per trade basis or per day basis. I think that if I can clean up my act and get rid of the undisciplined and un-planned trading I can get really consistent eventually. But I try to stay humble and don't take nothing for granted. It's very easy to lose your balance and mess up as a trader. There is not a great deal of margin for error when trading leveraged instruments. If I can 10x my account - only then will I think I know a thing or two about trading. I have a long way to go...
Since you are good at stats, have you considered only trading high-probability signals based on past performance? This way, you would not be overtrading. I have one such signal which is currently in play. The current signal is not perfect by my definition, but very close to being one, that's the reason I am long, paired with the seasonal expectation of a stock rally as well as many solid stocks trading at a discount and us being in an inflationary environment=higher prices (deflation=lower prices), this one ought to be on the money.
I hear you -- but for me I don't believe that price action is sufficient, especially with the stock market indexes. But I don't put too much "stock" in any one thing -- I just believe it's how one puts everything all together with a proper mindset and a little intuition. At the end of the day, I don't care how someone does it. You could be looking at the stars for all I care -- if it gives you an edge.