If you want to know how an edge works, it will be worth much more than you expect. I have a strategy that can make 10-100 times annually and is scalable, I think it is worth a billion, and even someone offers a billion, I would not sell it. I would rather to show performance, and operate someone's account to share profit.
Since your only value proposition is profit sharing, how much capital do you bring to the table? here’s a secret. The best mentors teach for free. They do it for people they like and because they want to share their knowledge out of either a sense of duty (pay it back) or a sense of altruism.
Thanks, can be hard to find as I don’t know many successful traders. I rather not say on forum…it depends how confident I am in the trading. 7 figures+
I can't even begin to understand and am being 100% serious. You could maybe convince someone to let them trade with you and they teach you and trade in front of you while you take a similar trade, learn and than split the profits you're making. But how can you expect someone to give you their edge so that you can use it and than give them some of your profits? What am I missing? Even if you're the most trustworthy person in the world, what kind of expectation can they seriously have of you paying them once you have the edge for yourself and you can use it at will? It really makes no sense at all to me. OR You're saying if someone can prove they have an edge, you're willing to pay for it prior to them releasing the full edge to you? Now that seems dangerous to you on the flip side. What if they give you a lesser edge? or 90% of the edge but leave out the other 10% because they feel the full edge isn't worth someone paying them a one time fee? Are you starting to see the issues on both sides here?
Well I mean at that point isn't it a different level of consideration? Since Time = Money(loose calculation can be weighted in either direction). Generally speaking for a lot of the population whether it should or not, money is still more valuable than time(if nothing else at least it feels like that to them). But the more money you get (particularly at a billion dollars) money becomes near useless and time becomes priceless, the weighting shifts drastically. So, if you tell me that it's fulfilling to your life to keep using your edge and makes you stay hungry. Than I totally get that. However, if it doesn't unless you're close to making a billion now or for see yourself making a billion relative soon, than since the weighting has shifted so heavily at this level it wouldn't make sense not to take the offer. Guess the only other argument is that you want to buy 300 million dollar super yachts and afraid if you sell your edge it will take away the ability for you to use it.
1. When you sell something, it is priced at how it is worth to the buyer, not the seller. 2.I am pretty sure a billion will not take me too long time.
You're probably correct, if your edge isn't niche related (which lower probability it is if you can scale it that way and it's that consistent). Than I am pretty sure I know the base foundation of your edge. Frankly I can't believe it's taken me this long to see it and am shocked at how few people show or teach the bases of it. I don't even think I've seen one educational video on it or see one person here mention it. I am seeing the scalability as well. However for me personally. I would take the billion. With a billion you don't need a true edge. You could just use time and account size as your edge and do very well. But I get where you're coming from.
First off, in the financial futures market, rest assured institutional investment size pays no attention to what pikers say on trading forums about their "trading secrets". We're simply trying to get a decent read of which institutional money side has the advantage at any given point in time where "given" is an area, not an exact price. Very simple things can and do work. The money management "trick" is to bet in a way to where the market catches you wrong when you're holding your smallest amount of contracts and catches you right when you're up to a decent to full size in a trade. This does not discard the method of all-in/all-out, just that it's most likely more stressful given the more violent gain/loss swings you'll experience and that's why accumulation is easier on the nerves. IMO, virtually any total piker can trade a micro NQ, RTY or YM contract where your max size is 1 to 2 contracts (i.e. represents 1 or 2 emini contract chopped up into 10 or 20...yeah, I know...duh!) and they're not doing dumb things like continually adding to a continually losing trade. Again, IMO, this is probably the most stress-free way to trade as being wrong on 1 to a few micros vs being right when accumulating them to a larger multiple will help keep you calm and cool during the drawdown periods. I would ignore the naysayers who would argue that the added transaction fees will nullify your edge. We're not talking about hyper mico-scalping here (where that case could hold true). For example, with a 10 micro contract max per trade, given the current volatility of the MNQ, one could expect to regularly make in the range of $300-$1200 in any given morning during the first 2-3 hours (just my personal experience). As has been noted by many of the highly experienced traders on these forums, do not try to automate your daytrading/swing strategies unless you can master trading them manually in real-time. [Nothing I do is "a trading secret". The only reason I don't post detailed trading strategies is because the blow-back of negativity or time-consuming answering of details ensures that absolutely no good deed goes unpunished. as an example, look no farther than NoDoji's prior posts before she left ET for good.]
Right I generally agree. However at the same time that isn't a true edge or even if you want to classify it as one, it's the lowest hanging fruit and difficult to make consistent exponential gains. What you're describing is literally what 99% if not more of this forum does including the traders here who show great results. It's literally them using account size and time as their edge. If you don't believe me try to get some of them to trade with you live, you would think you just threatened their life or something, that's how much they fear it. Larger players accumulate out of necessity to not price themselves out and to get a net weighted average. So, I understand the logic of someone else following that. But the only reason to average down and slowly accumulate as retail is because you don't have a very strong edge as to when the move is most likely to accelerate and unsure where to place your stop as well. If you truly have an actual edge outside of time, account size or wide stop loss than exponential gains will come almost by default. This is why I think a lot of traders struggle to be successful, because people they are following are using edges they don't have access to as previously mentioned. Not to mention the mental edge of being able to trader smaller size relative to your account balance. I mean this type of trading vs actually intra-day trading any type of size with a probability stop it's almost like not even the same thing, but of course this statement will offend everyone here who doesn't want to admit or understand where their edge comes from. At this point doesn't really matter to me, but just pointing it out.