money management to make a lot of profit with only 60% win rate

New comment
 

there is a way, i think, to make huge profits, i don't know why nobody talks about this kind o money management, it's based on using statistical blocks, to trade


1- a simple backtest with 60% sucess rate

o = wins

o  x  x o  o  o  x  o  o  x  o  o  x  x  o  o  x  o  o  o  x  o  o  x  o  o  x  o  x  o  o  x  x  o  o


2- So here's the deal, you create blocks out of these win rows, so how was the maximum loss in the best sequence of wins? 4


so then you create blocks of 4 trades

o x x o | o o x o | o x o o | x x o o| x o o o | x o o x | o o x o|  x o o x | x o o


3- So based on these blocks you know for a fact, that you never get more than 2 miss trades each block, so to make huge profits you only need:

here are all the possibilities in 4 trades, of 2 wrong trades:

x |x o o  - So  you wait for the 1 trade, if it's a miss, you can invest 50% for the next 3 trades, and certainly make  profit

x |o x o - The same of above

x |o o x  -The same of above

o |x x o  - here you don't trade, because the 1 trade was a win

o |x o x  -here you don't trade, because the 1 trade was a win

o |o x x-  here you don't trade, because the 1 trade was a win


So in every case in which the first trade is a loss, you still have more 3 trades, and you can invest 50%, you'll have more than 2 good trades, and only 1 bad, for sure, so you can always recover and make money in the end,  i would like to know if somebody else uses this kind of approach

 

Total BS.

  1. What happens before is irrelevant. It has no effect on the future.
  2. Invest 50% means if you loose twice you are bankrupt. No more trading. Never risk more than a small percent of your account (1%)
 
I mean 50% of the risky capital, everyone should have one of these. Maybe you didn't got the concept, there was no more than 2 miss trades each block, so the probability of 3 in one block is very rare, i don't mean impossible... This kind of money management in blocks, i don't see traders talking about it, but to me it seems very profitable, even with a 60% win strategy only.
 
Why you always searching for some one who work for free ?!
TIME IS MONEY
The developers' time is expensive 

Just open a job and hire any programmer there.
If your strategies are profitable for SURE (as you beleive) then losing such 30$ could gain you getting your dream EA!
 

funny.. you write so much but never get the point.

I hope at least you have luck.
How you go to develop a statistical system when you miss the statistics a.b.c.

What you wrote is anti-mathematics and anti-statistics.

 

Ah another one of his brain farts....

Oh wow look hes still talking about back tests.

 
i think backtests are essential, Jesse Livermore, a very famous trader wrote " whatever happens in the stock market today has happened before and will happen again". So testing back DO work. On my backtests for my strategies, that are even more than only 60% wins, combining with this money management give good returns on tests, that's why i'm sharing the idea, because studying money management now, is very important. 
 

I really appreciate your good character. Honestly. You want to share what you think is a good idea.

But at the same time, For your sake, I want to share with you the fact that your calculations are flawed.

Try to understand it, and think about it again. Because you miss things.

 
 i want someone to make it even better, or to prove this thing doesn't work, because on my manual backtests it seems to work, here is another example :


as i know that i don't have more than 2 losses each block, i combine all possible scenarios in blocks of 4 trades

here you wait and observe for the first 2 trades of each block, so

x x |o o  - Here you lose the first 2, so you are 100% sure the next 2 trades are a win

x o | x o  - here after the 3 trade, you could lose the 3, but then you are 100% sure the 4 is a win

x o| o x  - here the 3 trade is a win, and you don't trade the 4, because it will probably will be a loss

o x| x o  - ...

o x| o x  - ...

o o| x x - here you dont trade the 3 and 4 at all, because the wins already happened

 

There is no such thing as 100% sure. Unless you have inside info, and even then it is not 100%.

The most important thing is to proof it to yourself. Even if somebody proves you are wrong, you would dismiss it anyways.

That is also the reason why people who have proven themselves do not feel the need to brag about it or need any external reassurance.

 
mrluck1:
 i want someone to make it even better, or to prove this thing doesn't work, because on my manual backtests it seems to work, here is another example :


On manual backtest many thing seem to work..

Sometimes it happens even on computerized backtest

The fact is that your math is bugged, flawed.

123
New comment