There isn't much more of a hard core credential than making 10% monthly, or 6 figures everyday, 7 or 8 figures monthly, and breaking 9 annually.
Exactly. "Academics" obviously don't trade. Who cares of higher hypothetical performance if it puts you on the risk of blow-up? I perfectly know that my stops and targets probably decrease my performance big way... but my goal is consistent profit, not peak performance with huge risks. I leave it to gamblers, for me trading is a business and I want to run it as safely as I can. IMO one of the huge, dramatic mistakes most newbies make is trying to shoot for maximum performance instead of focus on consistency. They end up neither showing any profit at all nor being consistent.
20%+ yearly is absolutely possible for a day trader while keeping risk per trade as small as 2% per trade and keeping a maximum PTTDD under 20% (or 10 losses in a row). Being "hedged" is a BS, because 100% hedge = no position, partial hedge = just smaller size or synthetic position in the other instrument etc. Most people who talk about "hedging" obviously don't even understand what it is: hedging is a term for LOCKING IN price, it doesn't help speculator in any possible way other than making things unnecessarily complicated.
If I'm long stock or calls on that stock, I could hedge my position with puts and my potential profit would only be reduced by the cost of the puts. The maximum potential profit would still be unlimited. "Locking in price" is a different sort of hedging, the sort done by say airlines when they want to control their fuel costs. Also, if the stock were to have a disastrous gap down, by being hedged with puts it would be possible to still realize a profit in certain situations.
If you're long stock and you buy puts you're long calls as a result. Just different synthetic position with different risk profile done with extra commissions. If you're long calls and you buy puts you're long straddle or strangle. Same deal as above, just different trade.
You are laughing at a consistent $20,000 per year on a $100,000 account? Why are you spreading these exagerations on the surf report? Do you realize how few can do this consistently-- yet you mock it as some kind of underperfomance. I didn't think so previously, but now you are making me beleive you are another stealth vendor like your friend Xpert-- he was banned for making these types of statements for the purpose of attracting noobs for his services. Please stop posting here, start your own thread------ stealth vendors are not welcome here. surf
Dude, start you own thread. Nothing worse than someone with a severe lack of market experience, knowledge making statments like this in an attempt to make a point. I don't want this kind of HALF BAKED knowledge here, provided as the final word. If you don't want to be banned, don't post on the surf alert thread. Thank you.
If I even vend something, I do it openly, never hide. Moderators see everything and I am sure will take measures if something looks suspicious to them. I promise you to always be polite and only discuss actual trading, never ad hominem talks. So why should I leave? Now back to your question: yes I consider $20K on $100K a poor result. Of course it's meant to be poor result for already profitable trader. Who cares about how few or how many can do it? Do you compare yourself to losers or professionals? My deepest belief is one who decided to make a living by trading should only watch what winners do and care less of what 99.999999 or whatever % of the rest who lose suffer from except for the reason of learning what NOT to do.