pixel
DIY Trader
- Joined
- 3 February 2010
- Posts
- 5,359
- Reactions
- 345
"I started this thread so people who traded for a living and derived an income from the market could share their experiences and offer an insight to others who might like the idea of trading for a living or those who might be currently on a rigorous journey of knowledge and skill building so they one day could do the same."
Hi aramz;
that's what I thought - and got confused about injections about Millions in blue chips and time for the golf course.
Some people can't play golf or don't like golf.
Some people may enjoy working from home for a living.
It's indeed a question of choice, of lifestyle, of physical capabilities, and many more.
If I had a Million Dollars or two, I'd probably trade/ invest in a different way to the short-fuse daytrading and swing-trading that has paid my wages for the past ten years. Initially, the stress of having to perform was on a par with the stress of frustration in a middle management position, where the next layer was more interested in their perks, right to make stupid demands, and insist on ineffective principles, policies, and procedures.
Compared to that, working as a trader from home is Paradise, thanks to the ability to discuss matters en famille because trading success affects and interests everybody. The bliss of being able to say "I love my new Boss!" and really mean it!
On the other hand, the need for a professional approach, strict hours and attention to details - routine though they may become - is paramount. By the time the ASX opens, I have to be prepared - usually starting an hour before, checking Overseas markets, obtaining a feeling for which challenges and opportunities to expect today, checking on vulnerable and maturing positions, and finding options for new trades.
There are days, when nothing much is happening: all trades are humming along, and nobody is bothering me with emails and questions. When that happens, I don't consider it unprofessional to leave the office and have a "social life" for a change. Or communicate with friends and family around the Globe.
After Market Close, I go straight into book keeping: enter trades into my portfolio management system; evaluate successes and reasons for less successful early stop-outs, and have the computer report the actuals.
The afternoon is then free for family, friends, hobbies - whatever one's inclination. And if one's mobility is somewhat restricted, the computer can again be a window to the world.
The key to "Trading for a Living" is "Enjoying what I'm doing". If the attitude is professional and positive, success will follow inevitably.
Basically if someone wants to suss out what it would be like to work as an engineer for a living or a plumber etc you can do work experince and you can speak with lots of people openly about life in these professions. With trading for a living though it is hard to find people to talk to it about or get an idea what it would be like and learn of the rigours they go through during the day.
You’re not really going to make money a lot of money from the pros, but the amateurs come and go in steady streams. Amateurs who play loosly and passively pay the bills, so to speak. At first glance, it seems logical that it is this way in trading also. Pros don't really make money from other pros. Pros make money from amateurs. Pros set up shop here and there and trade various intruments, but they probably won't extract money and show a net gain from other good professional operations.
Great (first) post but I have to point out that point isn't true. Read up on some trading legends stories. They blow up millions/tens of millions. Where do you think that money goes ? Mostly to other pros. Most people consider people Jesse Livermore a pro. Yet he lost everything 2 times or something - that money has to go somewhere.
Lot of exalted hedge funds have big draw downs - that money also has to go somewhere, most likely not towards the amateurs. Lots of pro hedge funds close down due to large losses.
If pros don't make money from pros that means pros do not have big draw downs or losses at all.
After reading the recent posts encouraging silent members to post more often, I thought I'd make an effort to become more active.
I'm interested to hear how people have made the transition from a 'day job' to trading for a living.
I try to spend a couple hours each night studying & SIM trading futures, and most recently European bond futures. One issue I'm finding is that 2 -3 hours per night is not sufficient to research recent news events, charts, plan some trades, and then wait for the price action. (I have been looking at short term moves, mostly 1min & 5min charts)
So my question is: If you were starting over and had 2 hours per night available, what are some pros & cons for a End-of-day style vs a day-trader style.
For example, EOD data appears to be cheaper (or free) but then holding positions overnight increases risk.
Being a complete novice, any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.
Great (first) post but I have to point out that point isn't true. Read up on some trading legends stories. They blow up millions/tens of millions. Where do you think that money goes ? Mostly to other pros. Most people consider people Jesse Livermore a pro. Yet he lost everything 2 times or something - that money has to go somewhere.
Lot of exalted hedge funds have big draw downs - that money also has to go somewhere, most likely not towards the amateurs. Lots of pro hedge funds close down due to large losses.
If pros don't make money from pros that means pros do not have big draw downs or losses at all.
Hi
From the outset, I would not approach the question of EOD versus intra-day. I believe that the following questions are the most pertinent to answer:
1. How am I going to make money from the market?
2. Do I have any proof that this is the case?
3. Why will it persist?
Some contests are zero sum. These are like futures, FFX etc. For every buyer, there is a seller. The positions net to zero. For every winner there is a matching loser. The system is closed and then expenses are taken out too.
In FFX, the professionals profit at the expense of retail and the commercials.
In agricultural and consumable commodities, the loser is the producer. Professionals pick up the premium. Retail is a side issue.
When it comes to purchasing physical equities, it is not zero sum. It is possible for everyone to win (as an aggregate, at least) and lose.
The final point I'll make on this note relates to risk management. You have to survive if you want to have any chance of prosperity. Portfolio management and solvency management are vital if you are to allow your money making ideas to show through.
And my actual final point is that: Things generally don't turn out the way we expect. Heaps of what I/we believe to be true right now will eventually be falsified. Investments is a contest of beliefs. If your beliefs happen to be closer to the mark for the times, you will do alright. Markets don't stay still and change in nature all the time. Question: what way will you develop to evolve your beliefs most effectively?
Forget SIM, it doesnt prepare your emotions for the loss of real money.
I always cringe when ever I read this.
SIM is the most important thing you can do in trading there is nothing else that is even comes close to being as important.
Repeat SIM is the most important thing you can do.
Ummm I think actually trading is more important than SIM. If you're just trading for fun, maybe. If you actually want real dollars coming into your account, SIM will not work.
You can keep on repeating SIM for the rest of your life, let's see how you will pay the bills, I have a feeling the gas company will reject your SIM money
I'm not really sure where you got the idea from that pros do not have losses at all or that they need to have big drawdowns. There is a huge difference between a loss from 'limited risk trade' and 'big drawdown'. The former is a function of cost of doing a business, the latter is an amateurish psychological errors and lack of risk control.
Account sizes are totally irrelevant as there are some people trading millions of dollars each day yet they wouldn't be able to trade their way out of a wet bag even if their life would depend on it.
For example institutions' income is derived from clients management fees, and not from P&L. On the other hand there are traders who trade much smaller accounts but their income is strictly dependent on the results they produce. The latter, by my definition are the real pros, they need to be continually on their toes in order to stay in the business because their living depends on their results and not on some management fees from clients. Therefore they assume totally responsibility for what ever happens to them in the market, they never blame the market because they understand that the biggest variable in the market is the trader himself.
The latter is generally the erosion of an edge/change in market dynamics or simply variance. (Assuming there was an edge in the first place)
Pretty sure thats not how it works. How did they get millions of dollars to trade each day in the first place???
Those are 2 pretty naive assumptions: Instos don't outperform and all they do is make money from management fees.
Finally the issue about zero sum markets - its really quite simple for retail traders. FX and futs are zero sums. Equities are not. Hedging is irrelevant as that pertains to portfolio rather than the market
After reading this thread, it seems to me that some people are not yet aware what is really going on in trading. Trading in the real world is totally different than what the media or mainstream shoves down our throats. I believe that it would beneficial to first properly contextualise trading because it some of the questions being posed in thread are context depended, and hence if the presumed context is wrong, then the questions being posed and the answers are to some extent meaningless.
SIM will show if you have a trading method that may work.
SIM will show in what market conditions you trading method may work.....(this alone will determine your results not your genus.)
SIM will help you determine when your trading method will not work. (sounds crazy but most will not recognise this really important for your results)
SIM will help you determine a basic idea what size account you will need. (Having said that I know people who have blown up $200k accounts they didn't SIM)
SIM will help you build good decision making processors.
SIM will help you start to see what a loss looks like and what a profit looks like. (sounds dumb I know but people don't like losses there is a learning that they are part of the game)
SIM will help you build a psychology to deal with trading, making easy profits will hurt your psychology as much as making easy losses.
.
I'm not really sure where you got the idea from that pros do not have losses at all or that they need to have big drawdowns. There is a huge difference between a loss from 'limited risk trade' and 'big drawdown'. The former is a function of cost of doing a business, the latter is an amateurish psychological errors and lack of risk control.
Account sizes are totally irrelevant as there are some people trading millions of dollars each day yet they wouldn't be able to trade their way out of a wet bag even if their life would depend on it. For example institutions' income is derived from clients management fees, and not from P&L. On the other hand there are traders who trade much smaller accounts but their income is strictly dependent on the results they produce. The latter, by my definition are the real pros, they need to be continually on their toes in order to stay in the business because their living depends on their results and not on some management fees from clients. Therefore they assume totally responsibility for what ever happens to them in the market, they never blame the market because they understand that the biggest variable in the market is the trader himself.
The reason why you and skyQuake disagree with me is because you’re both still not fully developed as professional traders, and hence at this stage you yet don’t know what you don’t know. Once you’ll learn more about trading, then you’ll realise that at this stage of your trading development you are not yet at the level to be able to understand the hidden insights in the stories of Market Wizards or Jesse Livermore. Reading it and actually understanding it are two entirely different concepts.
I’ll leave you both with Jesse’s own quote, “A man has to guard against many things, and most of all against himself” . . . . and I’ll let others to interpret the hidden meaning in Jesse's quote instead of me doing it (I've already done it indirectly in my first post).
Definition of pro defined by the IRS is here: "Professional traders tend to have extremely high trade volumes. Many accountants use a minimum of 1,000 trades a year as a guideline, but others consider an average of 10 trades a day, or about 3,000 trades a year, to be a typical starting point. In addition to having a high volume of trades, professional traders also generally don't hang on to their acquisitions very long. They often buy and sell a position on the same day." http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20110417/REG/304179997
We were not talking about hidden insights from books. It is laid out clearly most of them have big losses. When George Soros "broke" the Bank of England and made $3billion pounds or something like that did you think he was taking money from an amateur trader at the Bank ?
If you're going to make assumptions on trading abilities and "developments as professional traders" then I have to make the assumption that you are not at that level too from your recommendation in the other post in the forex thread.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?