They lose cos they simply don't know what they're doing, and also they try to learn from people who are not different from them. So I even hesitate to call them traders. they're more like gamblers.
I dont lmw for sure. many trader fail and I think yes, as my experience making profit cosnsiettnly is ot easy task, sometime loss higher than erarly profit, and sometime faced with successive loss, and ssometime get margin call account and maybe many reason the cause of failure, greedy, reckless in trades and lack discipline etc
Interesting article with simulations about ES intraday trading. Just a small excerpt: If futures day trading is a negative-sum game, why is it so popular? Answer:This happens because 99% of the trading literature involves unsupported claims of day trading success and trading gurus would have no subject if they admitted the low success rate.
The fact that futures are a zero-sum game is a less important feature, the more important is the high leverage, which means that you'll go bankrupt faster than stocks if you're doing the wrong thing, and vice versa if you're doing it right...
That's a lovely vice versa -- but many people get blinded by thinking it will rain money on them instantly forever.
About that article: “In logic, if one claims that unicorns exist, the burden of proof is on him and not on those who object. “ This argument can be used against Harris’ statement too. It is too easy to ask from your opponent to show proof while your statements are like dogmas and shouldn’t be proofed. It’s not because you cannot proof something ( or don’t want to) that it is impossible. I object, so it is up to Harris to prove his point. A chart is no proof for me. “Whether you toss a coin or you use an indicator, performance is calculated based on entry and exit signals. When looking at sequences of entry and exit signals, they all look similar regardless of the method used to generate them.” For Harris they indeed all look the same. If you don’t know anything about animals, an elephant looks the same as a mouse for you as they have the same color and both have 4 legs and a tail. Knowledge from who is analyzing is important. That knowledge Harris misses completely. Random entries and exits as used by Harris have nothing at all to do with how successful traders trade. So his logic is complete nonsense. It is weird that none of the few successful daytraders ever wrote the nonsense Harris wrote. Weird because they are in a much better position to give a objective and realistic opinion as they trade. The fact that they are or were successful is the ultimate proof that Harris writes nonsense. Harris never traded as far as I know, he writes. “We cannot exclude the possibility that there are indicators that have predictive ability on intraday data but that must be proven using proper statistical analysis. Suffice to say that most known technical analysis indicators generate random signals.” Ask Harris to name 25 indicators and how they work and he will not be able to answer you. And then he pretends to be an expert? He wrote articles on various different subjects. He must be the smartest man on earth being an expert on so many domains. About the charts he shows: I see already one huge error that has a massive impact on his “proof”. In real trading people use stops, in his samples this is not the case because then we would see no distribution of losses below -20 % . Nobody will put stops further than -20%. Except Harris and idiots. I also don’t understand why small accounts would have bigger losses. $3000 margin per contract means that the number of contracts stay in proportion with the account. $3000 account means 1 contract, $30,000 account means 10 contracts. So return or losses will stay the same % wise.
Constant commissions, although irrelevant for futures, minimums matter for stocks and CFDs. Great, I'm an idiot, thanks for ruining my Sunday.
My mistake, I always think about futures as I only trade that. You take intraday losses over -20%??? I don't know where you live but I hope it is already evening there, so the damage will be smaller as the day is almost over.
Although it is well-known that profitable futures day trading offers low chances of success, many traders hope of beating the odds because they believe they have an edge. In most cases, the assumed edge is either a lucky streak of winners or some curve-fitted algo on past data. Although there may be edges in intraday timeframes, over time most cannot cover transaction cost and losses accumulate. Just because someone writes something, does not mean it is true for YOU! If anything, it shows that this person does not have a clue about how to make money daytrading the ES - and I am not one bit surprised by his silly and ridiculous comments! Making money is easy, when you know how. Keeping the money you make is another story, and this is where most who have a little bit of success fuk up - they think, just because they made some money by clicking the mouse, they now know everything about daytrading ES futures - big mistake! There is only one certainty when trading, and that is, you can lose. I know absolutely nothing about the intricate workings of the index futures markets, nor do I need to - done about 10 to 15 trades on ES in last 2-3 weeks (have to check exact numbers) and had no losers, largest drawdown was about just over $1k on one trade, but did not panic and sell with loss as my "simple investigations" into related markets indicated to me that the ES would "more than likely" rally back up, which it did. The main problem with this type of trading (wide stops), is that it carries high risk, and you leave yourself open to sudden moves against you if any major news causes the markets to make sudden movements. The lowest risk trades are the short term trades, meaning seconds to minutes, but also requires series focus and no distractions of any kind, from without, or within! The only thing I know, is that I really know nothing - but I can still make some money trading the ES, and hold on to it - so far anyway! Take everything you read with a pinch of salt - any trade that a person speaks about is not a real trade unless verified by broker confirmations - why would any person speak about trading and not show what they speak about, unless, of course, he/she is just talking out their arse, which most do! J_S