Which of the following winning strategies would you prefer(select multiple) - page 3

New comment
 
tonny:
also provide proof that your way is better because you are disagreeing with other people's preferences this is whx i had asked that anyone with adviser level powers to include their trading in signals so that the advice can be weighed
It isn't a strategy that I am trying to explain it is a fundamental way of determining if a strategy's Win Rate is a result of the strategy itself or simply as a result of the Risk:Reward used.  I have published my data above, you can reproduce it for yourself and confirm my findings or refute them,  it's a simple enough task for someone that can code a little mql4 or 5.
 
Im still not understanding. All this and you still hit 150k. My point is that a winning strategy is good as long as its risk of ruin(as in the  stats) of say 50% of the account is little. Its all in controlling the lot size that way even a risky and wining strategy can be traded safely.
 
tonny:
Im still not understanding. All this and you still hit 150k. My point is that a winning strategy is good as long as its risk of ruin(as in the  stats) of say 50% of the account is little. Its all in controlling the lot size that way even a risky and wining strategy can be traded safely.

As I have said before,  I did not lose £150k . . .  it is a cost, if you buy a burger for $5 have you lost $5 ?

The simplest way of avoiding ruin is to not trade,  so not trading is a good strategy ?

 

OK,  let me explain it this way,  take a strategy that is random in the way it places trades,  it goes long and short for no particular reason and it goes long 50% and short 50%. What do you think will be the win rate of this strategy ?  You can't answer this question without more information,  what information do you need ?

123
New comment
Reason: