the most important question in this forum
- This topic has 55 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by
.
-
It’s been said that 95% of Retail Traders lose money so if one took the opposite trade (to the 95%) then you might end up in profit!?
I think above is what Leo was saying in #58912 ??So if I asked a hundred people to tell me if they are profitable or not it is likely that 95 of them would be losers and 5 of them would be winners. Now the question is would you make more money by doing the opposite of the 95% or more by doing the same as the 5%?
I think I’d take the latter – far less trades of a known quality.
It’s been said that 95% of Retail Traders lose money so if one took the opposite trade (to the 95%) then you might end up in profit!?
I think above is what Leo was saying in #58912 ??A broker who does not pass on clients’ positions to the market takes the opposite trades all the time. That’s why they make money relatively safely.
Simply turning round a strategy that would have lost in the past is no successful recipe, because you still have the problem of all backtests : that the future will be different. Parameters optimized for maximum loss may well win in the future.
Brokers have access to the statistical sum of all clients (which you and we have not), and therefore they make money from the sum of the spread, overnight fees, and their clients’ losses, in case they do not hedge clients’ positions outside.
In addition, for a big broker, the majority of clients’ positions will cancel each other out (longs and shorts on the same instrument), and so they do not have to hedged. When the sum of all clients make losses because they are too stupid or too inexperienced, losses are in any case the broker’s gain, I think.
This is far from the most important question in this forum in fact it shouldnt even be here .. There ive said it
Sometimes it never ceases to amaze me how you manage to say what everyone else is thinking but quietly keeping to themselves. Are you from Australia by any chance?
I would saying when entering any business the most important thing to is evaluate the return on investment (both in £ and time). I think making a profit is the most important thing and so it is important to try and estimate that from other traders.
Maybe a small percentage of people trade for a motive other than profit but I don’t think they are business people.
This is far from the most important question in this forum in fact it shouldnt even be here .. There ive said it
Sometimes it never ceases to amaze me how you manage to say what everyone else is thinking but quietly keeping to themselves. Are you from Australia by any chance?
Yes i am Australian
Here are a couple resources and not all trading books that i believe will assist the journey Howard Bandy has a few youtube vids worth watching as well . Thinking Fast and Slow is a must read imo
I have literally 500 trading books and i doubt more than 10% of them are worth reading
1 user thanked author for this post.
Guys thank you very much for your posts I am grateful particularly Vonasi who has been professional, supportive and helpful and I admire his outlook on life.
I am a business man and was just keen to get a feel for who makes a consistent profit day trading stocks alone (not swing, not position holding, not fx, indices etc) There is no point spending many hours learning to code or setting up a business which never leads to a profit so I think my question is totally appropriate and fair.
The stats maybe 95% failure overall for retail traders but I believe that they are much higher just for pure stock day trading as the broker fees and lack of high volatility on liquid shares which can be traded in large volume prevent long term profitability.
I simply have never heard of a pure retail stock day trader who is profitable in the long term.
I personally find that indices are much more profitable due to tighter spreads and easier to trade.
Thanks again
1 user thanked author for this post.
Find exclusive trading pro-tools on 
