Reasoning: How do you become a millionaire? Or .... - page 21

New comment
 
Nikolai Krylov:

That's pretty much what I thought. It will work out just like I wrote in the post at the top of the page. It's a matter of habit, and it's only a matter of time before the depot is drained ;)

You shouldn't think like that Nikolay. If you think about it the way you do, then yes, you will.

It all depends on how you look at it. The result will depend on it.

Stick to the rules of trading, look at things positively, and everything will work out.

If the rules don't work, change them. You have to be flexible in trading.

 
Nikolai Krylov:

OK, then let me ask you a question. If a trader has had a 20% drawdown 2-3 times in a year - is that a good trader?

It depends on many factors. First of all, it depends on how much this trader earned during the year. That is actually from PV - the recovery factor.

  • If he earned less than his maximum drawdown during the year, then he is definitely a bad trader.
  • If he earned 2-3 times more than the maximum drawdown (ie FS for the year = 2 to 3), then the trader is more or less.
  • If he has earned 6 or more times more than the max drawdown (EF for the year >= 6), then the trader is clearly a good, even excellent.

It also depends on the techniques used. For example, if he got out of drawdowns using Martingale and was very lucky, then he cannot be considered good even at EF > 6, because next time he will be unlucky and will sell your deposit in a moment.

It also depends on how many trades he has made. If you have only 1-2-3 trades of 5-15 minutes each, then even a good result is most likely random.

 
Aleksandr Yakovlev:

You shouldn't think like that, Nikolai. If you think about it the way you do, then yes, a drain is inevitable.

It all depends on how you look at it. And the result will come from that.

Stick to the rules of trading, look at things positively and everything will work out.

If the rules don't work, change them. You have to be flexible in trading.

Thank you for your kind words, a kind word to the cat. Good luck to both of you )

 
Grigori.S.B:

It depends on many factors. First and foremost, it depends on how much that trader has earned in a year. I.e. actually from the FV - the recovery factor.

  • If he earned less than his maximum drawdown for the year, then he is definitely a bad trader.
  • If he earned 2-3 times more than the maximum drawdown (ie FS for the year = 2 to 3), then the trader is more or less.
  • If he has earned 6 or more times more than the max drawdown (EF for the year >= 6), then the trader is clearly a good, even excellent.

It also depends on the techniques used. For example, if he got out of drawdowns using Martingale and was very lucky, then he cannot be considered good even at EF > 6, because the next time he will be unlucky and will sell your deposit in a moment.

It also depends on how many trades he has made. If only 1-2-3 trades of 5-15 minutes each, then even a good result is most likely random.

Your calculations are good, but they don't take into account one factor - psychology. Otherwise all traders would be currency millionaires in a couple of years ;)

PS

Hedge funds work without stops, it's food for thought at bedtime. How do they get out of a drawdown?

 
Nikolai Krylov:

Your calculations are good, but they don't take into account one factor - psychology. Otherwise all traders would be currency millionaires in a couple of years ;)

These are not calculations, but evaluation criteria. They have nothing to do with psychology.

Nikolai Krylov:

Hedge funds work without stops, it's food for thought at bedtime. How do they get out of a drawdown?

Hedge funds don't always get out of trouble.

 
Grigori.S.B:

These are not calculations, they are evaluation criteria. They have nothing to do with psychology.

Hedge funds are not always chosen.

If calculations and valuation criteria are taken without taking psychology into account, then it's a pittance on those calculations and valuation criteria.

If hedge funds observe the MM normally, they do not have any problems. And 20% drawdown threatens the loss of reputation and clients in the form of banks and other funds once and for all.

 
The drawdown (as a rule) should be 90-99%, there is no sense to freeze the money on a broker / DC account (About banks and funds and investors - very funny :))) Why do you need silly bankers and investors who have not mastered arithmetic? They are a pain in the ass... What's the use? :)
 
Wizard2018:
The drawdown (as you would expect) should be 90-99%. There is no sense to freeze the money on a brokerage account (About banks, funds and investors - very funny :))) Why do you need silly bankers and investors who have not mastered arithmetic at school? They are a pain in the ass... What's the use? :)

I would like to ask you an important question, does your model have hysteresis?

i'm sure there is))))

 
bilbo_b:

I would like to ask you an important question, does your model have hysteresis?

I'm sure there is))))

It has everything that market charts have. Hysteresis included.

 
Wizard2018:

It has everything that market charts have. Hysteresis included.

;)

recently researched this topic

but somehow without it i finished writing the (hopefully) coolest martin

and put it aside as a complete expert.

the system is unbreakable, but the profits want to be better

1...1415161718192021222324252627
New comment
Reason: