I have posted numerous links to 'case studies'. The key premise (and ...once again...I loop back to the title) relates to the viability of trading as a trade vs other 'trades'. The amount of evidence is overwhelming. Simply Google 'probability of success as day trader. I assumed that (as a trading forum) most viewers were aware of the odds. As an example, here is a study from 2011 (note the game is much harder now - see my first post). http://www.nasaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Day_Trading_Analysis.pdf The key thing is. 1 Most losing traders are delusional/use emotions and do not accept objective numbers/facts as it flies in the face of their world-view/belief-systems/brainwashing. (Witness some of the posts on this forum). 2. A common mistake is not to adjust wins for risk, time/money invested and opportunity cost. Also, longevity. What if you have an 'edge' that lasts just 2 years? A CPA has an edge in the form of a marketable skill that will last him until retirement. As an example, a trader spends 10 years and £200k and makes £200k profit over one year in 2018 (but his 'edge' was short-lived and lasted for 2018 only). Logically, he would have effectively made a loss allowing for time and opportunity cost. However, such a 'trader' would gleefully post on such forums how he had found his Holy Grail and how he had arrived at the end of a spiritual journey and his genius level attainment. In other words, even those fraction of a percent who succeed (despite all the factors I have outlined in previous posts), very often have not succeeded at all if you dig deeper. Here is an interesting analysis. If someone pays me, I can do a similar one comparing the return on investment of day trading vs a plumber. In my opinion almost all day traders would be better off going to trade school. Of course, there are also other options that they would be better off in and not just trade school.
Anyone who puts that much effort into verbal diarrhea is usually hiding the fact they have no point. If trading is not for you, then
Another case in point ...emotions and name calling. No logic or discourse. However, I sense 'capitulation.' Also, the poster is confirming my premise without realizing it.
What you think is caputilation is in reality using common sense. I gave up "discussing" with you already some time ago. Other with common sense will follow and do the same. The only poster at your level is Zenostiffler. With him you are in good company. Each time I read postings from people like you I see David Goodboy AKA Marketsurfer appear again.
I am confirming that if you decide it is better to not trade than trade, then don't trade. Something you could have easily decided for yourself without the hand holding.
LOL. I am doubt you ever actually worked outside of back office if you believe that Nav Sarao actually caused the flash crash. You preoccupation with Steve Cohen is not indicative of an adult understanding of the industry either. Or, for that matter, that fact that you believe anything printed in the Daily Mail. Back to the topic, here is the breakup in a bullet-point form: Do people in professional risk-taking seats play the same game as the retail traders? No, not really. It's a very different mindset that centers on the research process (anywhere, from global macro to HFT) Do all professional risk takers cheat all the time? No, not really. It's an illusion perpetuated by the media - there aren't enough opportunities to cheat to make a living. Is the finance industry rather predatory towards the smaller guy? Yup, it sure is. So real estate (much worse, actually), yet people eagerly participate. Can a retail trader play the same game as the pros if he so desires? Sure, the actual barriers to entry are pretty low. Do they need specialized knowledge to do so? Yes, for sure. That is the key problem - a retail trader has better ROC expectation due to lower capacity requirements, but rarely has the skill to use that to his advantage. Could you be a successful hobbyist trader? Yes, and that is probably the most favorable outcome for a retail participant
You attacked me instead of the premise (...please refer to the title again...I am losing count of how often I have to do this). The premise is not whether I want to trade or decide not to but whether trading itself is a bad trade (for a conventional retail day-trading client).
Why does anyone care to engage in a theoretical philisophical bullshit exercise of whether trading itself is a bad trade. If someone is losing money cannot trade it is a bad trade (you). If someone is making money and can do it (not you in this case), it is a good trade for them. If you want to do it, do, if not....don't. No successful trader wastes time coalescing the vapors of man's essence which is why no one is bothering to respond to your demand for proof. We all have a side bet going as to how long we can string you along with this bullshit so just keep going as you are not even close to the lowest guess.