Is there a single way to actually make money consistently by trading? After so much time spent chart studying...

Crytpo - No
Stocks - Easily

you need an IQ above 110 to be profitable. not that hard

Play the long game. The get rich instantly guys are the exception. Do your research, have a plan, stick to it, and, for fuck’s sake, don’t ever go all in on anything. Keep yourself padded and safe.

For a little while longer. Prepare for a ton of sideways action this year

It's desperate how wrong it is what people believe to be true about trading or markets:

>zoom out

Ok, by "zooming out" you change your investing in aiming at longer, supposedly macro-trending time intervals. This alone does do shit. Predicting them is a problem in itself. Statistically it's easier to predict thje development of characteristics on short time intervals actually.

>day trading is meme

No, it is not. There are numerous strategies (market making, very different kinds of arbitrage trading, volatility trading, vwap/twap attempts at mean-reversion) all in the realm of day-trading that have proven to be highly successful.

>only trade at key points

Sure, and how do you reliably predict key points with charting? It's bullshit...

>trendlines, support/resistance, volume, moving averages and maybe macd

B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T! The best is "maybe macd" as in "it's good, but not so good as support/resistance", right? Like you would know.

>anything else is just searching for god

Yep, exactly, you came to this conclusion doing what? You have done your research, tight, my man, excluding, let's say VWAP and TWAP algos being effective for buy-side trading? Sure, you can quantify over all that shit and tell op to go by TA for best success.... Laughable.

>its better to not take a trade, then to take it an be wrong + never lose money

Thanks for these two.

Attached: u770707rl.jpg (2000x1000, 479K)

I don't actually agree with that and systematic trading is only one form. There are plenty of people that I know of that trade naked or on intuition. They don't have any kind of system nor are they robots when trading but they're profitable.

I've been a member of an expensive Telegram Channel. The guy has 8 years of experience and his team is all in it 24/7. Still not making money. All channels I tried blew me up. I'm just HODLing LINK for few weeks or months now. Planning on accumulating btc , metals and one wild card altcoin.

this is why you are poor and Im not

>...but they're profitable
> plenty

This would have to be proven to me to stop me from shitting at discretionary trading in electronic markets. I do know this actually was a working thing back in the days of open outcry, but now... Look at it this way: If there is a significant volume of the market coming from other humans all at one place - like it was at the CME - then it is believable that some of them are able to read the overall market sentiment thereby making good trading decisions. This did work, because the sentiment was what a statistically relevant part of the market participants actually was believing and they acted upon it. This edge is gone by today. It is gone in equities, futures and certainly rigged shitcoin markets.

>naked or on intuition.

Well above I was concentrating on the sentiment aspect more or less alone. But 'naked intuition'? Oh my, I don't know. I cannot say sth along the lines of "it's impossible" or so, but I must refer to my experiences: I am looking for profitable discretionary traders (in electronic markets!) more or less since 5 and a half years and I have yet to come by one.

Attached: tumblr_msihn4RCns1r87tiqo1_1280.jpg (693x720, 88K)

This pretentious bullshit that you post is irritating to read. I've responded to you before in another thread. "Ooooh I know what backwardation and contango is", "OOOh I know that many institutional algos use the VWAP for order execution".

You will not even bother to try and understand even a single aspect of technical analysis, In that prior thread, I mentioned Time Frame Confluence/ use of Multiple Time Frames to trade with, and even showed you an example of the importance of understanding how higher time frame trends can impact the lower time frames. You don't want to listen, or discuss, or have your ideas questioned. Regardless of any academic background you have, you're not someone worth discussing ideas with.

Trading is difficult, any form of it is, technical analysis is no different. Rather than requiring the ability to score through large amounts of data to find relationships between variables, or working on things like latency and the understanding of special order types specific to certain exchanges, Technical trading requires the ability to persist to getting stopped out frequently, avoiding trading against trends, and getting whipsawed in range environments. .

Until you actually trade with, and have experience with the issues involved with it, and then work towards developing ways to account for those problems, your fucking know-it-all attitude doesn't count for shit.

do now waste time with him, he wants to ne proven right, not make money. You and I know TA is just a measuring tool to identify opportunities with asymetric risk/reward ratio. But he has no concept of decision making under uncertainty, because he cannot comprehend the gist of risk management, whether in life, business or trading.

Attached: fXKaE.png (464x332, 279K)

Every at compare the price with the last year.
Is it higher than last year? Open long position.
Is it lower than last year? Open short position.
End of the year comes - liquidate.
You'll get 10-20% yearly.

yes. if you can somehow guess liquidity zones you can make money easy as fuck. but the hard part is doing this. first understand that 99% of price action is market maker's just building liquidity zones by painting the charts with TA and then making moves based on that. this is why people say TA "works".

at least this is how it is in crypto. a cannot speak for other markets since i havent studied them

>Tfw you spend so much time on biz you recognise two random anons by writing style
Feels bad man

>first understand that 99% of price action is market maker's just building liquidity zones by painting the charts with TA and then making moves based on that.

What?! I have never, ever heard anything more stupid, ridiculous and wrong than this. What the fuck is wrong with this board?

Sorry, but I am so upset, I honestly believe this has the potential to be a classic in the future: Dude?! Do you really believe what you said there? I mean, could it be you don't really grasp the meaning of what you were proclaiming there? I am not trolling or something, but this so such utter nonsense...you must've had a bad moment or something like that....

no im not. have you even seen the bitcoin charts? I can give you 10 examples of the past 10 moves bitcoin made. on bitmex you can see it but its most obvious on finex

Let's analyze what you said.

> if you can somehow guess liquidity zones you can make money easy as fuck. but the hard part is doing this.

NOT (!) that "liquidity zone" could be classified as being a defined term at all, but let's be benevolent. "Liquidity" as a term is neutral as to the direction of the transformation of a trading position, i.e. alone from summoning the term one cannot deduce if you were thinking on selling a position of assets for cash or building up a position of assets with cash. That's important. Now, I understand "liquidity zone" as a range of possible prices in an order book in such a way that this not well defined range is somewhat of a cluster in the order book as a whole. It is true that a market maker would do such a thing, but not without volume building up "from the other side" so to speak. A market maker's job is to provide liquidity by providing a price IN CASE someone wants to sell a certain asset AND providing a price IN CASE someone wants to sell a certain asset.

[have to split here]

Given what I said, I guess you could say a liquidity zone is a price range of what the market maker is willing to give a random counterparty in the asset he is designated sponsor for. But you cannot know the limits, i.e. the extension of that range by definition, because it is nowhere listed or available to you to look at.

I am not at all shitting about the incredible nonsense of you stating an actual market maker would TA be his guidance in offering prices. But still, it is total fantasy of you believing this. No sane company involved in market making would do that.

> sell a certain asset AND providing a price IN CASE someone wants to sell a certain asset.

Typo: First "sell" should be a "buy".

The reason most blow themselves up is because they expect to be doing 10% a day and be millionaires in a year. There are people who can do this reliably but they are the exception. Proper risk management and account management can turn even very basic startegies profitable. 1% a day is 37x your account in a year.

>What most of you shitheads here do...reading charts, shilling and praying, "trading" on sentiment coming off of social media....
>this is neither investing nor trading.

are you sure?

listen bro you're typing way to many fucking words. i cba to read all that shit.

yep, it's called 'gambling with an edge'.

Not sure why you responded to me there. I don't believe market makers "use" technical analysis. My understanding is that they're concerned over the "theoretical" value of something, and trying to buy below and sell above that.

More algorithmic market makers, like hfts in the futures markets, focus on things I did actually mention. Things like special order types and latency. What they try to do is contend for queue position in the order book, this gives them a higher fill rate, but also allows them to get out of a position that they no longer want (they actually some times become liquidity takers, and hit orders that were behind them in the queue, in order to exit an order that got filled). .

>naked or intuition
there has to be some reason behind this. their strategy probably just has less to do with charts and more to do with public sentiment or something less mechanical. Intuition is still a process of reason if not algorithmic.

>My understanding is that they're concerned over the "theoretical" value of something, and trying to buy below and sell above that.

This is 0% true of anything having to do with market making. A designated sponsor does not make money by estimating or calculating the true values of assets and then aiming to buy lower and sell higher. This is not market making.

>More algorithmic market makers

Again, no. All market making activity is done algorithmically. Or in other words: There are no market makers (besides market makers in RFQ-markets and some OTC-stuff in low liquidity bonds and other exotic stuff) replying to requests discretionary.

>More algorithmic market makers, like hfts in the futures markets, focus on things I did actually mention

No, wrong, totally wrong. Especially the market makers in the futures' markets don't do shit with TA.

>Things like special order types and latency.

You are confusing statistical arbitrage (aka latency arbitrage) with market making. HTF's being feed the order flow's by the prime brokers or ECN/MTF's and thereby doing predatory and legal front running of the big buy-side don't do market making in this sense: It's called latency arbitrage and a negative effect on the bid-offer-spread. Thereby it is by definition negative in the market making sense.

This is hard to reply to. Of course, I agree, that discretionary attempts at trading have been successful. But I was emphasizing the importance of significant human interaction in the sense of the human decision maker having to have the opportunity to read other human behavior and (!) these humans having a significant effect on price action in the market. I believe this is when discretionary trading has a chance to work, well, even well. Now go and look which markets satisfy these conditions...

Its only working for whales
So become a whale or stop trying today