If you had 3 years to learn, what would you choose?

[wez004]

Hello traders.

My first post on here and I thought I would make it one that would somewhat determine whether or not I would be making more posts further down the track. :
I like to do a lot of research before I get into anything big, and I consider spending time to learn new things as an investment, in that it means spending less time at getting better at the things that really do make us money- our jobs.

So I have a hypothetical situation for you. If you had 3 years time on your hands, and were willing to spend 1-2 hours a day doing one of the following 2 things, which one would you choose:

1. Studying to further your current career so that in 3 years time your salary could go, for example, from 60k pa to 90k pa, then continue working full time

OR

2. Learning trading, from scratch, so that in 3 years time you could be trading as your main source of income.

I realise this leaves a lot of gaps and is subject to your own personal goals, but I would love to hear what you all think and what path you might consider taking if you were in a similar situation.

Many thanks

 

[Trembling Hand]

All depends on how much your into your career vs how trading gets the juices flowing.

to flog a quote from a trading Psyc. Dr Brett Steenbarger

If my book accomplishes nothing else, I hope that it assists you in thinking about where your niche might lie, not just in trading, but in life. The days pass by quickly; life is too short to waste on anything that you're not passionate about and good at.​

 

[Timmy]

If ya gotta ask ... go with the career.

 

[BSD]

How much capital have you got?

If a $30K pay rise actually matters to your situation - in my humble opinion, you probably do not have enough capital to 'trade for a living'.

 

[metric]

If ya gotta ask ... go with the career.

persacly..

 

[robots]

hello,

also think carefully whether study is the way to go also,

many have gone to universities to no avail,

thankyou

robots

 

[metric]

the title of this thread was a pretty good topic. a really good question. then i read the the post, and it was a bit dissapointing. why must it be uni, or markets, or whatever..? what WOULD you like to learn?

If you had 3 years to learn, what would you choose?

that is a really good question...!

what would I choose? i dont know. it really does require some thought.

 

[wez004]

Thankyou for the responses.

Basically what I am trying to find out is whether it is worth pursuing learning to trade. I am fine with my current job, I do not need a pay rise but it would certainly fuel my main investments.
By studying i mean taking courses, the ones you pay for in order to get certifications which would then open up the gates to promotion etc. Not a hard task, it's just the time involved in getting those additional qualifications.

If I were to find out that trading for a living, provided one can do it well, was an enjoyable, profitable and time generous activity then I would consider taking on the challenge of learning. This means not only learning how, what, why and when, but also conditioning myself psychologically for the task.

So before I even look at a chart I am just after some idea of how my time would be best spent.

 

[adobee]

i would suggest finding out what you are passionate about and devoting your time to that.. ifthe 60k job is not your passion move to the one that is !
90k in three years will probably only be worth 60k today !!!

 

[onemore]

Hello traders.



2. Learning trading, from scratch, so that in 3 years time you could be trading as your main source of income.



Many thanks

Good luck, you might be able to save a lot of time if you find a mentor that is successful at trading. I wish i did it would of saved a hell of a lot time self learning and educating.
I wonder how many people after 3 years have made trading their main source of income? Not many i would imagine.

 

[Purple XS2]

Given the choice of the 2 cited, I would study a profession, either my current or a new one. As for studying the market, I can't see how there's any clear path as to what to study: the field is littered with experts in a myriad of flavours.

Widening the choice, I would study a second language: I'm envious of the multi-lingual.

 

[vishalt]

I'd rather have my career.

Being a journalist is an absolute gem of a career and I would not quit it for the world, so many areas and challenges to go through. From finance to tech and politics to motor cars and beyond!

And the power of the media is immense.

However I do save to invest long-term so I would prefer to work while long-term investments produce good returns over time (plus dividends).

Can't live off JUST a salary.

 

[xyzedarteerf]

For me I would choose education you can't put a price on that, its not even a choice you can always learn trading while studying for a career.

Plus you need a lot of capital to do day trading the potential for losses are too great even with those so called stop loss systems.

By the way I only trade to make extra cash as a newbie I don't see trading as way out of working a normal job. Hey if making money in stock is that easy everyone would be doing it. just my

 

[wayneL]

For me I would choose education you can't put a price on that, its not even a choice you can always learn trading while studying for a career.

Plus you need a lot of capital to do day trading the potential for losses are too great even with those so called stop loss systems.

By the way I only trade to make extra cash as a newbie I don't see trading as way out of working a normal job. Hey if making money in stock is that easy everyone would be doing it. just my

I beg to differ. A post of mine from last year. Of particular note, what I have emboldened in red:

An Interesting blog article from a bloke with a bit of credibility:

Ernie is a quantitative trader and consultant who helps his clients implement automated, statistical trading strategies. He can be reached through www.epchan.com. Ernie has worked as a quantitative researcher and trader in various investment banks (Morgan Stanley, Credit Suisse First Boston, Maple Securities) and hedge funds (Mapleridge Capital, Millennium Partners, MANE Fund Management) since 1996. He has a Ph.D. in physics from Cornell University.

http://epchan.blogspot.com/2007/02/in-praise-of-day-trading.html

In praise of day-trading

A recent article by Mark Hulbert in the NYTimes talked about the Value Line's rankings, and how this system is under-performing the market index in recent years. Mr. Hulbert asked Professor David Aronson of Baruch College whether this drop in performance means that the system has stopped working. Prof. Aronson says no: he believes that it takes 10 or more years [my emphasis] of under-performance of this strategy before one can say that it has stopped working! This statement, if taken out-of-context, is so manifestly untrue that it warrants some elaboration.

To evaluate whether a strategy has failed bears a lot of resemblance to evaluating whether a particular trade has failed. In my previous article on stop-loss, I outlined a method to determine how long it takes before we should exit a losing trade. This has to do with the historical average holding period of similar trades. This kind of thinking can also be applied to a strategy as a whole. If your strategy, like the Value Line system, holds a position for months or even years before replacing it with others, then yes, it may take many years to find out if the system has finally stopped working. On the other hand, if your system holds a position for just hours, or maybe just minutes, then no, it takes only a few months to find out! Why? Those who are well-versed in statistics know that the larger the sample size (in this case, the number of trades), the smaller the percent deviation from the mean return.

Which brings me to day-trading. In the popular press, day-trading has been given a bad-name. Everyone seems to think that those people who sit in sordid offices buying and selling stocks every minute and never holding over-night positions are no better than gamblers. And we all know how gamblers end up, right? Let me tell you a little secret: in my years working for hedge funds and prop-trading groups in investment banks, I have seen all kinds of trading strategies. In 100% of the cases, traders who have achieved spectacularly high Sharpe ratio (like 6 or higher), with minimal drawdown, are day-traders.

 

[hangseng]

Hello traders.

My first post on here and I thought I would make it one that would somewhat determine whether or not I would be making more posts further down the track. :
I like to do a lot of research before I get into anything big, and I consider spending time to learn new things as an investment, in that it means spending less time at getting better at the things that really do make us money- our jobs.

So I have a hypothetical situation for you. If you had 3 years time on your hands, and were willing to spend 1-2 hours a day doing one of the following 2 things, which one would you choose:

1. Studying to further your current career so that in 3 years time your salary could go, for example, from 60k pa to 90k pa, then continue working full time

OR

2. Learning trading, from scratch, so that in 3 years time you could be trading as your main source of income.

I realise this leaves a lot of gaps and is subject to your own personal goals, but I would love to hear what you all think and what path you might consider taking if you were in a similar situation.

Many thanks

Read "Rich Dad Poor Dad" and "The Cashflow Quadrant" by Robert Kiyosaki and also "Think and Grow Rich" by Napoleon Hill.

If you still don't know, then you may never know.

I read "Think and Grow Rich" every birthday from the time I was 17 until I turned 35, this alone changed my life. "The Cashflow Quadrant" provided directional focus, I just wish I read it 30 years ago.

Life is not as simple as 3 years/degree/no degree make more $$$. If it was everyone would be doing it.

I once said all I want is $1m in assets and a six figure income, so I now have both and much more, so what now?

Take the journey, destinations become meaningless.

 

[juw177]

Read "Rich Dad Poor Dad" and "The Cashflow Quadrant" by Robert Kiyosaki

I personally will not recommend Rich Dad Poor Dad. When I read it, it motivated me to look outside a conventional career and that it does well. But it did not have much substance on how to actually become "financially independent" except for a few anecdotes. I later read that the "rich dad" was probably fabricated and most of the book is fiction.

 

[nizar]

If ya gotta ask ... go with the career.

Gotta agree with this.
I couldnt have said it better.

 

[ceasar73]

All depends on how much your into your career vs how trading gets the juices flowing.

to flog a quote from a trading Psyc. Dr Brett Steenbarger

If my book accomplishes nothing else, I hope that it assists you in thinking about where your niche might lie, not just in trading, but in life. The days pass by quickly; life is too short to waste on anything that you're not passionate about and good at.​

Perfect!

ceasar73.

 

[Santob]

Go with the career choice. If you can handle doing 1-2hrs study each day for three years, you'll be surprised at how much longer you'll *want* to continue spending that much time each day learning about other things.

I've been studying about that much time each day (mainly spent on public transport reading books) advancing my career, all self initiated too, so no certificates, degrees or such.. But now i spend about the same time learning about trading also, so I've got the best of both worlds.

 

[AMR]

A stable career and trading are not mutually exclusive. Or maybe you should try active investing while you learn?