Why do 95% of traders lose? - page 2

New comment
 
Andrey Luxe:

They say that 95% of traders lose money in the long run (i.e. they can win for a month, half a year, a year, but after a while they still lose their money) .

Can anyone properly explain the reasons why they lose money?

..Emotions, not following the MM, not following trading tactics and changing it during trading - all that, but there are a lot of robots in the market that do not have those human characteristics. So who can tell the real reasons why people and robots lose money on the markets? Still, 95% of traders who lose money, I think that's a lot.

Because there are a lot of people and a lot of money, and you are alone. Millions of people go over combinations every day to make money. If a person were to go through 2 million combinations, the probability of taking a profit would be on his side. That is, you have to continuously generate trading rules and use profitable ones, and you have to do it faster than a million other participants in the aggregate do.
 
Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

Exactly! The point is that, apart from the current price (CD, green), there is a market price (P, red), invisible to anyone (except my indicator), which at any time can turn into a visible CD price, sending the former CD into the invisible area, turning it into P. That's it! You went in analysing CD, and you are confronted with unknown P! Simply, no one wants to seriously study the new market theory https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/58256


And there you have it! A pusher of his "theories"!
 
Boris:
And here he comes! Pusher of your "theories"!
What's wrong with your theories? It's not like he's claiming to be right.
 
Andrey Luxe:

They say that 95% of traders lose money in the long run (i.e. they can win for a month, half a year, a year, but after a while they still lose their money) .

Can anyone properly explain the reasons why they lose money?

..Emotions, not following the MM, not following trading tactics and changing it during trading - all that, but there are a lot of robots in the market that do not have those human characteristics. So who can tell the real reasons why people and robots lose money on the markets? Still, 95% of traders who lose money, I think that's a lot.

Because trading is not even a zero sum game (how much some lose, others win), but with a negative expectation, because everyone pays industry (commissions, spreads and other overheads). And everybody pays a lot) So this 95% pays the industry and the remaining 5% :)
 
Andrey Luxe:

They say that 95% of traders lose money in the long run (i.e. they can win for a month, half a year, a year, but after a while they still lose their money) .

Can anyone properly explain the reasons why they lose money?

..Emotions, not following the MM, not following trading tactics and changing it during trading - all that, but there are a lot of robots on the market that do not have those human characteristics. So who can tell the real reasons why people and robots lose money on the markets? But 95% of traders that lose money, I think that's a lot.

Assume the postulate that money doesn't appear and disappear, it goes from one pocket to another).

You can make an analogy with poker - there are only 1-2% of professionals who take money from less professional participants and newbies. On forex, one of the professional participants is a dealing center that chisels out arbitrage strategies against its clients.

And moreover in the market each transaction is accompanied by transaction costs (commissions), which already shift the distribution of earners / losers far beyond 50/50, as Avals said above

 
Alexey Busygin:
What's wrong with your theories? It's not like he's claiming the truth.
Claims significance without presenting anything! He would display his theories "concerning trade" in his environment of scientists! He may be known there already, and here, maybe he will rise in his own eyes! He's a born upstart, you should feel sorry for him... He's enjoying himself!
 
Ром:

Proceed from the postulate that money does not appear and disappear, but passes from one pocket to another).

You could make an analogy with poker - there are only 1-2% professionals who take money from less professional participants and newbies. On forex, one of the professional participants is a dealing center that chisels out arbitrage strategies against its clients.

And moreover in the market each transaction is accompanied by transaction costs (commissions), which already shift the distribution of earners / losers far beyond 50/50, as Avals said above

DC should provide service, should not take part in trading, like a croupier only casts lots, serves, not "dumps" like a DC!
 
Boris:
Claims to be significant without representing anything! He would display his theories "concerning trade" in his environment of scientists! They probably know him there already, and maybe he will rise in his own eyes! He's a born upstart, you should feel sorry for him... He's a self-pleaser!

And you, what do you imagine? You are wrong at least in that the man has a theory and you have only one grievance.

Come up with your own theory and then we'll discuss it!

 
Boris:
The DC should provide service, should not take part in the bidding, like a croupier only casting lots, serving, not "throwing" like a DC!
Should not... you mean out of conscience?)
 
Alexey Busygin:

And you, what do you imagine? You are wrong at least in that one person has a theory and you have only one grievance.

Come up with your own theory and then we'll discuss it!

I keep my "theories" to myself, consider it out of modesty, but on the conviction that it is better to call less and do my job quietly! And general theories do not work, and you have to have a lot of ideas, as many people as possible, the richer the market, not all just work for sharks according to a stencil!
123456789...18
New comment