If you ask Taleb, his win rate was horrible, his RR was astronomical and he made enough so he could retire, lives like a king, teaches and writes books. Kidding aside, what is important in my book as a mom and pop retail trader, is to be able to beat a benchmark like SPX consistently year after year. Nothing else matters, not even risk adjusted returns.
Is your 15% win rate the same as saying that 85% of the time you make no money on your trades? Does it mean only 15% of the time your trades are right? If so, for me I wouldn't be able to sleep. The risks are too high and although all indications were at the end of a period I were in profit, knowing that profits depended on a slim % of trades, I would myself stop trading that system
on my last run on a paper account i had 67% win rate on 140 or so trades over 15days. GPR of 4.6 but it doesn't mean much as you can't compare these figures across strategies.
gain to pain : sum of positive PnL / sum of negative http://eclecticinvestor.com/the-gain-to-pain-ratio/
+1 "Win rate" is a meaningless metric. Make 3 trades... Trade 1 loses $100 NET Trade 2 profits $100 NET Trade 3 breaks even NET What is the win rate? Does the win rate indicate the soundness, capability, or profitability of the trader? make 10 trades 7 trades (in a random order of the total number of trades) each lose $100 NET. 1 trade loses $300 NET 2 trades (in a random order of the total number of trades) each profit $600 NET What is the win rate? Does the win rate indicate the soundness, capability, or profitability of the trader? Without using values, even something simple like avg P avg L per trade to benchmark against, win rate means nothing. You can play what-if with win rate, that's about it. What-if trading metrics = sim mode.