90% loosers in FX

[BullMarket]

“Birdman, I'm so happy that you presented your views on linguistics. I'm sure the linguists of the world will be so relieved to know that English doesn't have a written language. And to think of all those years we've wasted trying to understand something that has never existed in the first place. I'll be presenting your findings at the next conference I go to and everyone will be able to go swimming now instead of working. Cheers mate, you've just made thousands of people happy.”

The English language has been written using the Latin alphabet from ca. the 7th century. Since the 5th century, the Anglo-Saxon Futhorc had been used, and both alphabets continued to be used in parallel for some time. Use of the Latin alphabet was influenced by the Futhorc: the letters þ (thorn) and ƿ (wynn) are derived from runes. The letter ð (eth) was devised as a modified version of d, and ȝ (yogh) was created by Norman scribes who derived it from the form of the insular g used in Old English and Irish alongside their own Carolingian g. This resulted in an English alphabet which consisted of a total of 27 letters (the 23 letters of the post-1st century BC Latin alphabet, one modified Latin letter, two letters borrowed from Runic, and one letter borrowed from the Insular Latin hand). Additionally, the ligatures w (for vv) and æ (named "ash", for ae) were in use.So as you see the English alphabet is a combination of many.


-Frank

[huggybaird]

Originally Posted by jsman

That's why FX trading is the most attractive.

Imagine if 90% of trader gain they gain little. But because of 90% of trader lost, so 10% of trader gain equal the amount of loss of 90% of trader, each trader gain 9 times in average!

This is true if trading was a zero sum game (which many people think it is). I've been backtesting strategies for some time and have actually executed over a million trades on paper. One thing i've found many traders dont realize is how hard it is to beat the broker spread. To give an idea, in a free world, i have strategies that will earn 17101 pips per year by executing 5091 trades average of 3.36 pips per trade. In the real world with broker spreads (not to mention slippage), it earns -.87 pips per trade (-4,400 pips per year). Good strategy.... not good enough.

The reality of this strategy is that i'd lose money (0.87 pips per trade) and whoever the broker used on the other end of the transaction to fill my order would loose even more money (5.10 pips per trade). Definatly not a zero sum game. Lucky brokers

[J327]

Originally Posted by biggo

Hi

A bit of Trivia !!

The phaomnneil pweor of the hmuan mnid.

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

The smae alplies to the mrkeat. See the wohle ptcirue dnot get lsot in ervey tsiwt and trun of pcrie menvoemt. Be prat of the mraekt.

Yup. It does work!

[pipscooper]

Originally Posted by huggybaird

I've been backtesting strategies for some time and have actually executed over a million trades on paper. One thing i've found many traders dont realize is how hard it is to beat the broker spread. To give an idea, in a free world, i have strategies that will earn 17101 pips per year by executing 5091 trades average of 3.36 pips per trade. In the real world with broker spreads (not to mention slippage), it earns -.87 pips per trade (-4,400 pips per year). Good strategy.... not good enough.

You have discovered what few persevere to ever find out. Every aspiring trader would benefit from reading this post. In particular I like the emphasis on how important every single little pip is to the final result. And many think that the big operators make tons of pips on every trade, and have lots of room to spare. In reality when you boil it down to an overall average, a few pips either way can make the difference between making a lot of money and losing a lot of money. This is even more important for shorter term traders, who tend to have lower average profits. Before I started trading I worked for a large company that had an extensive grain trading operation. The guy who was running the financial side of things for the grain division confided in me that their average profit per lot was about a nickel. The kicker is that they did like 250 million lots that year, and they hedged almost everything. So even the big commercials fight for every penny.

[amarnath]

Hi,


Try to design a strategy to make more than 5 pips dont shout that you cant make money still beacuse of spread , slippage etc . Or simply you start own brokerage if you think running a brokerage is easy and highly profitable that trading .

[birdjaguar]

Originally Posted by BullMarket

The English language has been written using the Latin alphabet from ca. the 7th century. Since the 5th century, the Anglo-Saxon Futhorc had been used, and both alphabets continued to be used in parallel for some time. Use of the Latin alphabet was influenced by the Futhorc: the letters þ (thorn) and ƿ (wynn) are derived from runes. The letter ð (eth) was devised as a modified version of d, and ȝ (yogh) was created by Norman scribes who derived it from the form of the insular g used in Old English and Irish alongside their own Carolingian g. This resulted in an English alphabet which consisted of a total of 27 letters (the 23 letters of the post-1st century BC Latin alphabet, one modified Latin letter, two letters borrowed from Runic, and one letter borrowed from the Insular Latin hand). Additionally, the ligatures w (for vv) and æ (named "ash", for ae) were in use.So as you see the English alphabet is a combination of many.


-Frank

I agree with you Bull Market on the development of the English language and I don't claim to be a linguist. I was merely refering to written language, which may or may not be phonetic. Written symbols have meaning in and of themselves. For example, if the letter 'C' meant 'see' or 'sea', then that would be part of a written language. The letter 'C' in English doesn't mean anything. It is phonetic only. While certainly not an exhaustive list, logographs, ideographs and heiroglyphs fit the category of written language. Phonics do not, although phonics can be applied to written symbols. How this relates to trading is that written languages work a different part of the brain. Written languages work more like numbers. And, of course, numerical relationships are directly related to trading. This discussion is just a matter of working on thinking outside of the box toward developing and executing an edge in the markets. This fits the same category as the previous post regarding the phenomenal power of the human mind and the ordering of the letters. If we can stay out of the box, we are more likely to stay in the top 10% of traders who are consistenly profitable. Happy trading.

[huggybaird]

Originally Posted by amarnath

Hi,


Try to design a strategy to make more than 5 pips dont shout that you cant make money still beacuse of spread , slippage etc . Or simply you start own brokerage if you think running a brokerage is easy and highly profitable that trading .

Silly goose, i'm not shouting you cant make money. I make money. What i'm saying is that the 90% of people that are loosing are not loosing to the 10% that are winning. The vast majority of the 90% are loosing to other people in the 90%. And, from talking to people that work as a DBA of a particular broker (starts with FXC*), the number is actually 94% are loosing. But, maybe other brokers have fewer loosers so it averages out to 90%. I dunno. But, i know the number of loosers is high

Another interesting thing to mention is that shooting for higher gains is not necessarily the answer. What i mean is the winning trades of the strategy i mentioned average 42 pips per win with a max of 240 pips. I initially thought that by increasing time frames and take profit goals, the broker spread would become less relevent.... i initially thought wrong. The average of the wins and the max increases, but, if you look at ALL the trades it actually averaged to a smaller gain than the original. Just food for thought.

It is super easy to find strategies that make an average of 100 pips per trade over short time spans or few trades (less than 100). With those short burts, broker spread is not too important. But, i've never found one that will stand the test of time (the last 5 years) and make thousands of trades with the same results. Maybe someone smarter than me has

[TRADE]

Jesus......

what a bunch of losers.... see how this thread has been sabotaged like many others.

it only takes one small minded individual to divert the topic away from the main discussion posted before a flock of others look to correct or follow the other before him.

traders lose in FX because they dont have their own edge, making decisions based on the few actions of other traders........ the crowd is primitive.