It is not a question of shyness. Why should someone have to [I]prove [/I]their profitability to anyone? And in any case, even when someone [I]does [/I] ocasionally show evidence of their profitability it is only met with scorn, doubt and sarcasm and accusations of lying, fabrication of results and deceitfulness as well as accusations that they are really only trying to sell something to gullible newbies - hardly conducive to offering evidence of anything!
When people offer opinion and/or advice then it is simply up to the reader to decide whether it is useful to them or not.
Whether a poster is profitable or not is totally irrelevant to another poster. Each and every trader is ultimately on their own when it comes to profitability- and you know why? Not because of any properties of the market at all - it is all down to the personal abilities and characteristics of the trader themselves. But most will not accept that. They will blame the markets, blame their āadvisorsā blame the brokers, blame the weather, the Central Bank spokesman, the internet connection, the interbank conspiracies, the randomness of life itself, in fact anything that will give them an excuse not to look in the mirror at the real culprit.
There are surely few careers that make you stare at your own mistakes and failings as transparently as trading forex. It is a humbling business that does not tolerate laziness, abuse, arrogance or unwillingness to accept oneās mistakes. It is hardly surprising then that profitable traders who have learnt the lessons and the humility, respect and dedication that markets demand are just a little reluctant to make a number of their results. Shyness or modesty, call it what you like, but until a trader can find his own feet in this trading environment then whether someone else is profitable or not is not the slightest bit of use whatsoever.
However, I want to believe that before you opened REAL trading account you have passed through DEMO account. Perhaps if this is the case were you not making PROFITS in your DEMO trading account, i donāt think there is much different b\w these 2 accounts. I suggest you go back to DEMO account and fortify yourself. Alright, thank you.
There seems to be two opinions about using demo accounts. One argument goes that a new trader should only trade on demo until they have achieved a consistent success rate for, say, 6 months, and only then go live. But the other camp argues that a demo account excludes the psychological element that is oh so critical to successful and consistent trading, and that it is therefore better to trade live from the beginning but with micro lots where you are dealing in a few dollars or even cents.
Personally, I believe in both. A demo account is not a bad idea for even the most seasoned of traders when testing new ideas and strategies. I use a simulator provided by my broker pretty much every weekend rerunning and practicing and improving and testing my trading over and over again through different time windows. Is that not what any professional should do to keep their head above water?
On the other hand, successful trading is about the trader and their expertise. This requires a live market even if the actual amounts are small. And, lets face it, if a newbie doesnāt have a few hundred dollars to spend on their learning and skills development, then they shouldnāt really even be here.
Well I donāt know about that, but you, PMH, you have been there and gone through it. You have done your apprenticeship. And, like any veteran you know that when a computer programmer, after only 4 years of failing, instead of asking where am I going wrong, prefers to tells you that:
[I]1. This is a random market.
Market moves (considerably) [B]only [/B]when news comes out.
Your broker will not quote you when market moves considerably. Your stops will be ignored and your money management strategy will be ruined. Of course, this does not happen when you backtest a trading strategy.
Youāll be profitable only while you are lucky.
Donāt be fooled, the only guys making solid money in this market are trainers, brokers and companies selling trading bots (that work until you run out of luck).
[/I]
you know that not one of these claims is true and that it is not worth even wasting oneās time on. While the negatives look to spread their negativity onto others in order to justify themselves to themselves, the realists just get on with their workā¦
Note that point ā6ā is missing completely:
What have I been doing wrong?
Sometimes it amazes me how any thread here that deals with how losers lose is always so popular that it can go on for years!
A simple explanationā¦ See a coin flip is random. There is nothing you can do to get an edge, the result will always be random.
Something similar happens when trading FOREX, there is nothing thatās going to improve the chances of your trade to be succesful. It will always be a question of luck.
Any strategy based on indicators o combination of indicators, will not survive a long term backtest
Any strategy based on trend lines, S/R, pivot points, fibs, round numbers, or whatever based strategy you use, will not survive a long term backtest
Any strategy based on Elliot Waves, retracements, or whatever type of patterns, will not survive a long term backtest
Any strategy based on price action, candle patterns, doji, hammers, you name it, will not survive a long term backtest
As market conditions will eventually repeat, not to survive a long term backtest, means it wont survive long term in the future.
Any fundamental news will cause a random efect in the market, as it will be open to traders speculations, goverment interventions, banking operations,etc. so you use this for any strategy, long term, it will burst.
Just accept it. FOREX behaves RANDOMLY. Most of those bumble bees will fall sooner or later. Just wait. And if somehow you manage to be succesful an live out of the FOREX market for all your career, CONGRATULATIONS, YOU ARE A LUCKY **.
Someone made a good point. We know successfull business men and stock market traders, that explain how they made their fortune.
But talking about FOREX traders however, everything seems to be so foggyā¦ wonder why?
Logic tells me that the stock market may not be as random as FOREX. Like come on!, everything affects currencies, every imported piece of crap you purchase will have a minimal weight in the market. This makes it so random. But a companyās stock, any inside whistleblower can give you an edge. You just place a SL and hope the information is good. And in stock markets, you have an indicator that IMO is a real game changer: VOLUME!. Having volume information make S/R levels much more significant. We donāt have this privilege in FOREX. So whatever. I really donāt care. As I said, just want to share my experience and my opinion. I respect all of you who want to stay AND wish youā¦ GOOD LUCK!!
Off topic comment: Truth hurts, but probably [B]most [/B]of the people who trade FOREX are here because they cannot afford to trade Stocks. Would like your opinion on this.
try betting on the fact that somebody will flip a coin. there you always bet right.
your list is missing a strategy based solely on risk/reward
bullseye score except of course a few exceptions.
youre 100% right on this statemeny, and you are 100% right on many statements you madein this thread.
good luck to you too and remember: patience is key to sucess.
If forex markets, or any markets, were truly random, thereād be no such things as trends. Because trends exist, they are the proof of non-randomness. Trends are the key factor in what we can say with certainty about all markets -
trends tend to continue
but not in a straight line
All the bunk about forex being random and therefore unprofitable, and trends only occurring 20% of the time and therefore unusable, is just bunk.
I totally agree with this!!!..and I really donāt know why you call this an āoff topic commentā, it is (IMHO) at the very core of why [I]so many [/I]people lose in retail forex trading (which is not actually, genuinely, foreign exchange trading at all)
ā¦and not necessarily just stocks, either, you are talking about investing existing real capital compared with speculating non-existent capital via a leverage mechanism. I explained my view on this once and repeat the main bit here (not saying I am right, just stating my view of this):
It is very sad to read many 1st posts on this site from people who have āheard ofā or been ātold ofā forex as a way of making a lot of money and gaining financial freedom. They naively enter the fray with no education, no training, no teacher, no experience and, of course, as you sayā¦no capital! They are trying to take on institutional size business with a pocketful of peanuts via the leverage mechanism.
No one can hope to simply [I]invest [/I]USD100 capital and make a living from it. The only āwayā is via a leveraged position that offers the equivalent reward of a manyfold larger investment. You are effectively promised that you can āmake the profits from a multiple thousand investment without the actual multiple thousandsā¦ā
Every one knows that there is āno free lunchā and the cost of this set up is ādisproportionate riskā- and Newbies rarely know how to handle this risk and rarely give it sufficient importance in their strategies. Their forcus is on their methods and systems, thinking, erroneously, that the secret lies in the method and not in their risk and funds management skills.
There is no university degree, nor established educational programme nor selection process nor minimum capital available to limit entry into speculative retail trading - pretty much anyone can start.
So it is not at all surprising that most fail.
In this we agree 100%
But to place the blame on the market instead of on the trader is where we disagree, totally.
The market is just the market, we have to find a way to live with that and alongside it. In the most part, we are not part of that market at all, really, we exist in a shadowy area that runs alongside it, mimicking its movements, that consists of bets between brokers and retail traders with equivalent sums of money that do not exist.
We trade [I]risk [/I]not [I]capital[/I], yet few realise that to trade risk you need to learn risk and manage it - not just keep fiddling around with indicators and lines and updating the current ābest fitā until we stumble across the Holy Grailā¦
So your claim is right, why most are hereā¦but your argument that the reason why most will fail lies with the market and/or the broker and/or luck is not (necessarily).
Itās not irrelevant to me. If I could find someone here on BP who has a live account FF explorer or myFXBook track record thatās more than a year or two old, and itās in the green, that would be inspiring. I would not scorn or disbelieve such proof as long as it wasnāt heavily censored.
Still amuses me how some people assume these markets are random. Ah well, canāt argue with stupid
Referring to the market in general as akin to flipping a coin shows a deep misunderstanding and flawed logic. Take a step back and look at what your suggesting.
Depends what you are looking for. If you mean mirror trading a successful trader then yes I would agree - at least as far as his last trade.
But if you mean improving your own trading skill then anything anyone sast should be carefully considered in your own context whether they are profitable or not. Then you are improving yourself - at least as far as your own last trade
I would concur with just about everything PMH, Manxx, Turbo, Averied, have said.
I would also add that IMHO the people most likely to tell complete strangers details of their āsuccessā are in many cases the very people you would wish to avoid-Iām sure you can figure out why by yourself.
I entirely understand and agree that most of what is discussed here on BabyPips is based on opinions, thatās the purpose of a forum after all.
However, donāt you just get tired of the same BS being posted by people who only have one agenda, an agenda which does not involve helping others? Iām not going to pus$y foot around these comments just for the sake of āgetting onā - if a comment is deeply incorrect and misguiding then iām personally going to argue it, as others should also do too.
This, in my view, is the biggest deterrent that will put off people from joining BP who can actually add value from their own trading experience.
There are a handful of incredible members here who are the driving force behind many of the accurate and helpful posts; it would be nice to have more at some point in time too.
Iām not a grumpy old fart in real life - just didnāt get much sleep last night
Well, this is itā¦if something is factually wrong it should be challengedā¦but some things are very subjective, like āthe best pair to tradeā, or āideal position sizeāā¦, so it is difficult at times to provide factual proof in favour or against certain points of viewā¦ I feel that the āmarkets are randomā is one such unproven statement, as nobody so far has come up with more than their own personal experience as āproofāā¦, Would you say that is a fair point, that is, that unless someone has stats to back up their statement for or against the āmatkets are randomā point, then we should all just have our own opinion?
The point of āmarkets are randomā, or not, can be proven by logic. Take the following two points if you will.
Itās fair to say that an edge can not be obtained in a random environment, this I agree with. What edge you may think you have when taking part in a random environment is simply down to the random distribution of outcomes, hence luck. Usually this is short term and as the sample size increases the ārandomnessā starts to become apparent. I hope this part makes sense?
If you can not obtain an edge in a random environment, but you do have an edge, then itās fair to say that you canāt be taking part in a random environment. Edges exist in trading, they are achieved from successful retail traders to successful commercial traders. To have an edge means you have a degree of control, or a degree of knowledge that can be exploited onto the markets.
PMH, you also said you have spoke to successful traders outside of BP, this alone is proof that the markets can not be random. You canāt have an edge in randomness, because it will be diminished over time.
It doesnāt matter if the markets are 99.9% random, that remaining 0.01% is all that you need to tip the scales in your favor. Iām not for one second saying that future price can be predicted, because it canāt, this is at best guessing. However, there are times when we have a higher probability of being correct in the market place; perhaps a higher than 50% [I]chance[/I] of being right [which when combined with RR opens the door to leveraging your edge]
Guys, people are making long term careers from this industry, this is not by luck. They are making the right decisions and have had the right education.
I donāt think it is unproven, afterall, even the OP changed his mind on this after having first claimed that they are random:
And this is good. It is an important step in clarifying the entire situation here. And, in fact, no one is actually saying the market is random. Afterall random would mean entirely disjointed and unconnected price sequences like 1.12056, 1.04321, 1.16437, 0.2345, etc etc. But our markets move smoothly through every pip when the liquidity is present - and when the liquidity is missing is simply jumps over interim prices but not in a random fashion.
So maybe it would be far more beneficial to drop the ārandomā issues and concentrate on the real problem here - which I guess we could call āunpredicableā rather than ārandomā - a term that Averied also uses here.
I am sure most people would agree that prices do tend to move in ways that seem very illogical and unexpectedly. So the real question, maybe, should be is it feasible in unpredictable markets that:
(a) one can identify a new move, and
(b) that the new move would continue far enough to make a profit, and
(d) that one can recognise and close wrong positions with a smaller loss than the profit from right positions over a period of time
Once we omit this pointless ārandomā issue from the discussion then we enter a more realistic and concrete discussion of how the above steps can be achieve - if at allā¦
