I'd like to add to my comment from earlier (extract below):
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by glennki
"there is only one true measure of trading success. And that is the first option - pips gained/lost"
Measuring the number of pips moved (in your favour or against you) is a measure that is independant of the trader's account size, the leverage they use, and the position size that they take. And therefore it is a measure that is independant of the RISK that a trader takes.
|
There is another factor to consider, when adjudicating the number of pips gained, say per month, by a signal_service. And that is whether one has the capital to trade all the signals_.
If one signal_service gains on average 300 pips per month, and another 1000 pips per month, many people may be left with the impression that provider 2 is the better of the two, and will sign up there. But the number of signals_ issued, and consequently, the number of open positions at any one time, may not allow the subscriber to trade all the signals_ without over-exposing their account. (I am expecting a barrage of rebuttal at this...)
When one has entered trades based on the first few signals_, and has reached one's maximum risk level, some people may be tempted to enter trades based on further signals_ with a hope of achieving even greater gains. All that this does is bring on a greater risk of a margin call. Once again, leverage will be the killer if the multiple positions are highly correlated and the tide turns against one.
Therefore, I think that quality signals_ on 2-4 pairs with low correlation, are more useful than 16 pairs that are all against the USD. It's less effort and stress to manage fewer positions in any case. Perhaps a better measure of service is pips/number of pairs.