Fastest way to 2x your Account.

 

This is actually a question. What is the fastest way to double your account, even if risk is very high, and bad DD, and all that jazz. Just wondering, like a slot machine, you just put $10 in and in 1 hour you either have $0 or you have $20.

What's the fastest, most aggresive way you know of?

 

Open a trade with maximum lotsize. TP=100 leave the sl blank.

result 1: margin call (more likely)

result 2: epic win.

 

on alpari with a leverage of 500 you need 300$ to open 1 lot of EurUsd. each pip values 10$ a so you will need to set the TP to +30pips and you will have doubled your account.

a margin call you will get at 25% margin level. so if the market goes against you 22,5 Pips you get stoped out and you will have 75$ left.

 

So..

+30 pips = double account

-22.5 pips = loose everything (plus spread, which is about 3pips, so really -19.5 pips )

Thats not bad, I mean it is, but it's not impossible. I was just at the casino last night and put in $20, and everytime I do I remember that you only have a 33% chance of winning...... forex seems to be about that chance as well...

 
aku11a:

So..

+30 pips = double account

-22.5 pips = loose everything (plus spread, which is about 3pips, so really -19.5 pips )

Thats not bad, I mean it is, but it's not impossible. I was just at the casino last night and put in $20, and everytime I do I remember that you only have a 33% chance of winning...... forex seems to be about that chance as well...

thats not true, if you play roulett (black and red) you have a 49.0526316 change of winnig. (on a single zero roulette) and afaik on blackjack your chance is even higher...
 
aku11a:

So..

+30 pips = double account

-22.5 pips = loose everything (plus spread, which is about 3pips, so really -19.5 pips )

Thats not bad, I mean it is, but it's not impossible. I was just at the casino last night and put in $20, and everytime I do I remember that you only have a 33% chance of winning...... forex seems to be about that as well...

Read the above post again. if you lose the 22.5 pips you will still have 75$ left, this means

lose -22.5 pips -> lose 225$ (plus spread)
win 30 pips -> win 300$ (minus spread)

without transaction costs (spread, commission) it would be a fair chance. Bet only 0.1 lot instead and place the TP at 300 pips and the influence of spread and commission decreases by a factor of ten. You just have to wait a bit longer but 300 pips can happen in two days without problem. Use GBPUSD, it does some nice big moves from time to time. Place the TP at 22.5 pips (or 225) and you have nearly a 50:50 chance. Apply some analysis of the markets before you make your bet and you might be overall profitable

 

Thanks 7bit that is very useful and interesting, I may try that..

God this seems like an awesome casino game, "Forex Slots"... if you could boast a "51%" chance of winning, you'd sure draw a crowd... Plus, it wouldn't technically be 'gambling' so you could host it in cities/stores where normal casino's are illegal..

 

7bit's post is indeed interesting, should be made sticky for newbis at forex. What you can read from this post is:

The bigger the Timeframe/Moves you try to catch the smaller is the impact of transaction costs on your risk reward ratio. Of course the potential profit is much higher on lower timeframes/moves but you realy need a rock solid system to overcome the "house advantage" on this small moves.

Of course trading higher timeframes/moves with a solid moneymanagement needs a deeper poked.

so my conclusion (which confirms my experience of killing a few small accounts but up to now no big one) is that it is realy hard work to get profitable with a small bankroll.


//z

 

The lesson to be considered here is that if your strategy can be boiled down to basically being a 50:50 gamble then why bother using forex as your avenue to gambling?

Go to a casino where you might have very similar odds but MUCH higher entertainment value for the risk you are willing to make.

I don't take trades unless I have 80-90% confidence my takeprofit objective will be met before my equity at risk is stopped out. Plus factor in time-horizon aspect...who cares about 90% confidence if the payday is 10yrs from now and the CAGR works out to be less than inflation?. In the same respect a 50:50 bet is really a fool's bet regardless the timeline involved, be it 5 minutes or 5 years. Any fool can make a 50:50 bet, it takes knowledge and effort to not take those bets that determines who ends up with your money - you or the other guy who took the other side of your trade.

 
1005phillip:

...it takes knowledge and effort to not take those bets that determines who ends up with your money - you or the other guy who took the other side of your trade.


Very good point.

I just can't see how to be 80% confident in any strategy, it seems like everyone here says that making a profitable EA is impossible, and only a hobby..

That's why it seems like at least a 50/50 EA would last longer than a completely wrong EA I could code...... How are you getting so confident you can say 80/90% you will win?..

 

First of all it starts with setting your expectations properly. I take about one trade per week. Folks who seem to crash and burn expect to churn trades on H1 charts or even smaller timeframes. I say all the power to them but I haven't found success at those timeframes.

The trend is your friend, my strategy really is no more complicated than that.

Setting up a strategy that is any more complicated or "savvy" than that tends to be a recipe for opening yourself up to massive losses as the next black swan is wholly uncomprehended in such new-founded strategy. Again, just speaking from personal opinion, I'm sure all the new-age Soros traders out there would beg to differ and I don't begrudge them their aspirations.

For every trade I make in forex there is someone on the other side who is betting against me being right...but only one of us gets to be.

Empty words from me since I have proved nothing of my track record, but I suspect you can see the logic in what I state regardless the absence of proof to back it up.

Reason: