If I "invested" $2500 in your fund the first thing I need to know is what is your daily loss limit. Second thing I need to know is what is your variance. I expect only a small fraction of my $2500 would be exposed to risk in the market. Not the whole thing. And if you gave me back $4000 in 10 days I would ask to get out of your fund. That Variance is off the chart. I have no interest in that kind of volatility nor is that kind of volatility sustainable long term. And as the previous poster mentioned, your math is off there. That would concern me as well.
I can only repeat what Rick Perry said after screwing up on national TV -- OOPS! LMAO! $4000 is 60% greater than $2500. Not 62.5% greater. Now we know why you can't trade. You can't even do arithmetic. [/QUOTE]
Mav, it was my math that was rediculously off but it was not my proposition in the first place. I agree, it's ice to grab the windfall return but you need to cash in on the spot. No sustainability.
I was commenting on Volente's 62.5% vs 60% (the correct answer). You were offering a hypothetical. But regarding returns, I think most of the serious posters here fully understand the mathematical relationship between risk and reward and between variance and the probability of ruin. It's why Bill Gross is managing 500 billion with 7% annual returns and LJM Partners is managing mostly his own capital and maybe 50 million with returns occasionally topping 50% annually. No one wants the volatility.
1000 is at risk Same performance metrics as the lowest combine. So we can agree that a $1500 return on a $2500 investment is a pipe dream ?
You still are struggling with basic math. I'm not investing 2500, I want to give you 50k. I would make that investment on the condition that the daily loss does not exceed 1k a day and I would prefer the annualized standard deviation to be be under 15%.
you're sounding like nodoji. so how are the traders at tst doing? frankly, me thinks that tst will probably attract guys and gals who are reflective of M. Patak.
I'm already on the record saying I doubt most of the TST guys will ever see a check. But that's primarily because of the type of person who is attracted to TST. Which frankly, is the ET crowd. I'm also on record saying TST is the BEST thing that ever happened to them because instead of blowing their life savings giving futures trading the old college try, they can blow out losing just a few hundred bucks and then go back to their day job and live a normal life. Blaming Patak for their failures is like blaming Bugsy Siegel for Vegas and building the Flamingo Hotel.
sounds sad and bleak. maybe M. Patak should change something so he attracts traders with a better chance of succeeding.