It has been estimated that 8 out of 10 individuals who attempt to trade make no money. A recent survey of daytraders in the US found that 75% had lost everything within two years. This is an astonishing rate of failure in any endevour, what is even more amazing is that this rate of failure has stayed remarkably constant for approximately 150 years. This is as long as records of speculation on futures exchanges have been kept. I would theorize that as long as there has been speculation that the rate of failure has been about the same.
The remarkable thing about this rate of failure among traders is that it has stayed constant. Yet consider the advances that have been made in that time. Traders have access to sophisticated computer systems with complex technical analysis packages, data can be relayed around the world in seconds, every home computer now receives information that was once the preserve of sophisticated dealing rooms. Despite these advances the majority of individuals who actively seek to trade markets fail and fail dismally. Therefore the problem must be so intrinsic to the people involved in trading as to be immune from advances in technology.
To answer the question as to why the majority of traders fail would seem to open up a Pandora�s Box of reasons yet the reasons for failure are often quite simple.
When people begin to trade they follow one of two courses. The first group merely guess about the direction of whatever they are trading or they take tips from a variety of sources. As you can imagine this group do not last very long. The second group is a little more sophisticated, they embark on the quest for the Holy Grail, that one tool or indicator that will allow them never ending success in the market. Unfortunately this magic indicator does not exist and the majority of traders engage in a fruitless search for it. Such traders constantly buy new packages, spend hours scouring the internet for the latest indicator, even believing that if they change the colour of their computer screens that this will enhance their chance of success.
In reality the search for the Holy Grail or system design as it is more formally known should occupy only approximately 10% of a traders time. But for most traders they focus all their energy on system design and in particular they focus upon entry signals. Entry signals are but a small part of your trading system, in fact they are almost irrelevant. A true trading system is composed of a variety of features only one of which is entry signals. Many of you will object to my saying entry signals are irrelevant but consider the following. If you were to trade markets completely randomly that is your chance of success was only 50% and you had a 2 to 1 expectancy. That is for every dollar you lost you made two dollars you can still make a fortune trading. In fact it is reputed that the legendary group of traders known as The Turtles do almost this in fact it is reputed that their trading system is only right 30% of the time yet they are among the most successful traders in the world. If you do not believe me perform this simple exercise start will $10,000 make your first trade a 10% loss and your second trade a 20% gain repeat this exercise over and over and watch how quickly your account grows.
As you can see from this simple exercise it is not where you enter a position that determines your success. It is how much you make on average over your trading career not how many times you are right. Traders are judged on how much they make not how many times they are right, in fact being right is irrelevant to whether you make any money. Yet the majority of traders are obsessed with entry signals, each of them has a desperate need to be right. This is a sign of a trader�s ego creeping into their trading and it is an early warning signal of impending doom.
System design is therefore far more than entry signals. Implicit within the mechanics of trading system design is the concept of the expectancy of your system. That is how much you make per trade versus how much you lose per trade. Any slippage you face when you place an order, this includes costs such as brokerage, stamp duty and any difference between your intended exit point and your actual exit. How often you actually get to trade, there is little point in having a system that has a huge expectancy if it only produces one trading signal per year. Finally what are your exit criteria, getting into a position is easy, it is when you get out that determines whether you make any money.
It should be obvious that system design is not a matter of looking for a magic system but rather of developing a comprehensive approach to engaging the market. Yet even with these additional features trading system design is still a minor portion of your trading armoury. The key features that determine your success are money management and psychology almost everything else is irrelevant.
I am firmly convinced that trading is a psychological and not a financial endevour. Traders focus upon system design for a variety of reasons. The first is that it is easy. All technical analysis software consists of almost nothing but entry signals and these are very easy to manipulate in the search for the ideal indicator. To illustrate how absurd this can be consider Fibonacci numbers, many traders default their indicators to reflect these numbers but in essence how is a 13 day moving average superior to a 14 day or a 12 day moving average. In doing this, traders are obsessed with what they perceive to be the secrets of the market, that somehow they must discover these secrets.
The second reason why traders concentrate upon entry signals I alluded to before, it is the need to be right. In simple terms each of us has an ego, therefore we have an emotional stake in all the decisions we make. It is difficult for us to be faced with a situation where we are wrong just as many times as we are right and this is what happens when we accept that the most common entry signals such as moving averages are right approximately less than 50% of the time. Therefore we attempt to redress this balance by looking for a system that is right all the time. Thus traders attempt to protect the fragility of their ego from the realities of trading.
The third reason traders spend so many fruitless hours on entry signals is that trying to get a perfect entry gives the illusion of control. Traders believe that somehow their entry signals give them control over the market. This has often been referred to as the lotto bias and the example often cited is that people pick numbers in a lottery based upon a variety of superstitions rather than having them picked at random by a computer when the lottery ticket is purchased. Once again such people have a need to feel that they are in control even when it is clear they are not, the chances of winning a lottery remain the same irrespective of the method used to pick the numbers. The same is true in trading your chance of success or failure is unaltered by the fact as to whether you pick the numbers for your moving averages based upon Fibonacci numbers or whether you pick them randomly.
I don�t want to give the appearance that developing a trading system is irrelevant, traders do need a form of entry signal. We need to have some idea of what the prevailing trend is and what conditions to expect in the market upon entry. But to concentrate on entry signals alone is to ignore the complexity of systems and the vital importance of money management and trader psychology. Once traders begin to understand the importance of these two key elements they are on the path to being long term successful traders. Ignore these features and concentrate only on the search for the Holy Grail and you are certain to join the 8 out of 10 traders who make no money.
I am firmly convinced that trading is a psychological and not a financial endevour. Traders focus upon system design for a variety of reasons. The first is that it is easy. All technical analysis software consists of almost nothing but entry signals and these are very easy to manipulate in the search for the ideal indicator. To illustrate how absurd this can be consider Fibonacci numbers, many traders default their indicators to reflect these numbers but in essence how is a 13 day moving average superior to a 14 day or a 12 day moving average. In doing this, traders are obsessed with what they perceive to be the secrets of the market, that somehow they must discover these secrets.
The second reason why traders concentrate upon entry signals I alluded to before, it is the need to be right. In simple terms each of us has an ego, therefore we have an emotional stake in all the decisions we make. It is difficult for us to be faced with a situation where we are wrong just as many times as we are right and this is what happens when we accept that the most common entry signals such as moving averages are right approximately less than 50% of the time. Therefore we attempt to redress this balance by looking for a system that is right all the time. Thus traders attempt to protect the fragility of their ego from the realities of trading.
This hits the nail on the head. In trading, most of what we are cultured to focus our contentration on is technical or academic. It takes a strong personality to objectively assess the price information the market gives and take the correct action, even if taking that action proves their own bias wrong.
Added 04/08: Original article by Chris Tate with sidebar links to his other papers.: The Trading Game
I decided quite a while back to scrap all the indicators and concentrate on money management. I started trading more or less randomly and just seeing what happens when I adjust the profit-loss ratio (I describe this ‘system’ in the Dark Side of the Forex). Most of my confusion went away, and my confidence has grown quite a bit. This week, I am trading at a ratio of 2:1 and looking at a 10.42% profit. No indicators. No signals. Just a set of simple rules, a stop loss level, and a take profit level.
I’m still playing with the ratio, so I can’t yet guess at the consistency of returns, but I agree that you can take profits without fussing over a bunch of technical issues. Money management is more important, and should be studied first.
The ENTRY determines whether or not you have an OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE PROFIT. That’s what matters.
There is no point in entering a trade if that entry does not have a high statistical chance of winning.
Note I wrote statistical chance. Statistics deal with the past and probabilities deal with the future. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN TRADING so you have to react in the moment. But I know based on statistics how far a currency will range in an hour, what the max and min values are, how many times the previous ranges were above/below the current and average ranges, etc… in REAL TIME. And that is my edge.
Exactly, James … there are as many ‘entry signals’ as there are traders and nearly all of them can potentially make a lot of money [I]if managed correctly[/I]. That is where [B]your own[/B] psychology comes in and that is the determining factor between success & eventual failure IMO.
Because it is ‘easy’ to make money with forex (once you’ve mastered a few basics) trading these markets will go to the core of your own relationship with money … and before you are allowed to become truly successful you will have to master the largest obstacle: yourself. If you have greed issures, or fear issues, or lack & limitation issues or arrogancy or complacency issues or any other issue … trading the forex market will uncover them & taunt you with them until you figure out what is [I]really[/I] holding you back. :eek:
That’s why the support of so many others in here, like you, tymen, Tess, Jo, Andrewunknown, to mention just a few, is so important to those of us still learning how to master … ourselves.
Surely this isn’t right. If you, for example set a stop loss of 20 pips and took profit at 40 pips, then sure, you’d gain twice as much in a win as you’d lose when you lost, but because the stop-loss is twice as close to your starting position than is the take-profit marker, wouldn’t it mean you’re twice as likely to lose than win, meaning you’re back to 50/50?
With a 2:1 reward/risk ratio you can only be at break even losing twice as much trades as you have won.
2 wins - 2x40 = 80 pips
4 loss - 4x20 = 80 pips.
