Is it really possible to become rich from trading?

[SheungWan]

Same as in any other gambling scheme: The bank always wins!

Watch the move "The Wolf of Wall Street" - could be very educational to you.

'The Wolf of Wall Street' was neither about banks or Wall Street,

[AyG]

Same as in any other gambling scheme: The bank always wins!

Watch the move "The Wolf of Wall Street" - could be very educational to you.

'The Wolf of Wall Street' was neither about banks or Wall Street,

Agreed. But it was about naked greed, a theme that runs through certain banks and through much of Wall Street, so it could be very educational.

[SheungWan]

Same as in any other gambling scheme: The bank always wins!

Watch the move "The Wolf of Wall Street" - could be very educational to you.

'The Wolf of Wall Street' was neither about banks or Wall Street,

Agreed. But it was about naked greed, a theme that runs through certain banks and through much of Wall Street, so it could be very educational.

Naked. Greed. Educational? Would that be the Classroom Gogo?

[attento]

Define 'Rich'

Define "trading"

[phaykk]

If you go into work and your name is on the building you are rich.

If you go into work and your name is on your desk you are middle class.

If you go into work and your name is on your shirt you are poor.

UNK

[Naam]

Same as in any other gambling scheme: The bank always wins!

Watch the move "The Wolf of Wall Street" - could be very educational to you.

'The Wolf of Wall Street' was neither about banks or Wall Street,

Hollywood at its best

[ToYoungToRetire]

Two days ago I was up %10...Today i'm up %8.... Two weeks ago I was down %20.... I'm playing high risk stocks...

But its very easy to lose money, but I cant stand casino's and at least you a small chance to make gambling on stocks.

[timewilltell]

I trade the YM & ES, Us indices. The ES is stronger than the YM at the minute so longs in the ES and shorts. In The YM. Tuesday shorted the YM at resistance - stopped -20 pts. Shorted again at the next resistance and a nice move down. Market internals looked sloppy and the move started rather choppily down, looked corrective so exited for a nice profit +40 points. BAD trading as the down move really took off and actually never violated any pivot on my timeframe.

A positive day with profits curtailed by fear and exiting too early with insufficient reason. My grade score a D.

Last night shorted the highs near 16800 in the YM again. Another near perfect entry. It moved off 50 points to prior resistance also hear the lackluster lunch period which I noted mentally. Market internals sloppy again so I held on remembering Tuesday and my errors. Gave back 20 points this time when the market took out my (higher than usual stop). Missed the double higher bottom at resistance and let the lesson of Tuesday overshadow my normal rules because I was also expecting follow through.

Made 30 points but grade score a D again.

I repeat this process daily grading my entries and exits, printing out charts, plotting support and resistance where the buyers and sellers have been active, plotting fib levels, pivots, market internals, volume and marrying the whole picture to get a bias and decide before the open where I will enter and exit and position size and targets.

Over time you just get better and start noticing things like tick jumping up but prices just sit there (a minus(, or vice versa. Extreme levels of certain indicators used for exits sometimes, and a Miriam of other things. You can make money but only if you are dedicated and keep noting your trades and the mistakes you make. That is the process of learning. It is not easy and most people just see the prices dropping so sell chasing the market having done no prep work. That is never going to work but is what most people do.

If you want to trade then examine your personality and find a mentor with a style that suits you. Then study for at least 3 months, 6 better devoting your day to studying historic charts, price action and market internals until you can look at a chart and see the levels for entry and how to exit. Build up a picture of the next trading day and then start trading when you think you have a grip. Trade the smallest size possible, the indexes good because stocks can have horrible gaps. You will soon see where you are lacking and then fix those issues first before you invest more. You will learn every day but eventually succeed.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[goatfarmer]

The longer the term of your trade, the better the possibility - - as in buy and hold which is not really trading. Day trading is extremely difficult and seems to take a very distinct and unusual personality in addition to the hard work and naalytical skills that will increase your odds.

You give few specifics but try it out on paper first - then buy mutual funds.

There is no reason to buy mutual funds. Fees are too high. ETFs are a better option.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/06/quotations-on-index-investing-refusing-to-believe-in-magic/

[AyG]

The longer the term of your trade, the better the possibility - - as in buy and hold which is not really trading. Day trading is extremely difficult and seems to take a very distinct and unusual personality in addition to the hard work and naalytical skills that will increase your odds.

You give few specifics but try it out on paper first - then buy mutual funds.

There is no reason to buy mutual funds. Fees are too high. ETFs are a better option.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/06/quotations-on-index-investing-refusing-to-believe-in-magic/

That really is a rather naive attitude. For large cap stocks, government bonds in well researched, liquid markets, few fund managers can add value. However, for small cap stocks, emerging markets, niche markets, some (but not many) fund managers can add value through stock selection which more than compensates for the fees involved.

Also, there are many asset types for which ETFs are not available - particularly an issue if you don't (for tax reasons) wish to invest in US-based ETFs.

Very much it's horses for courses; sometimes an ETF is the better vehicle, other times an actively managed fund is better.

[SheungWan]

The longer the term of your trade, the better the possibility - - as in buy and hold which is not really trading. Day trading is extremely difficult and seems to take a very distinct and unusual personality in addition to the hard work and naalytical skills that will increase your odds.

You give few specifics but try it out on paper first - then buy mutual funds.

There is no reason to buy mutual funds. Fees are too high. ETFs are a better option.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/06/quotations-on-index-investing-refusing-to-believe-in-magic/

That really is a rather naive attitude. For large cap stocks, government bonds in well researched, liquid markets, few fund managers can add value. However, for small cap stocks, emerging markets, niche markets, some (but not many) fund managers can add value through stock selection which more than compensates for the fees involved.

Also, there are many asset types for which ETFs are not available - particularly an issue if you don't (for tax reasons) wish to invest in US-based ETFs.

Very much it's horses for courses; sometimes an ETF is the better vehicle, other times an actively managed fund is better.

Not all ETFs are constructed in the same way, so it is better to refer to particular ETFs if they are the weapon of choice.

[goatfarmer]

The longer the term of your trade, the better the possibility - - as in buy and hold which is not really trading. Day trading is extremely difficult and seems to take a very distinct and unusual personality in addition to the hard work and naalytical skills that will increase your odds.

You give few specifics but try it out on paper first - then buy mutual funds.

There is no reason to buy mutual funds. Fees are too high. ETFs are a better option.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/06/quotations-on-index-investing-refusing-to-believe-in-magic/

That really is a rather naive attitude. For large cap stocks, government bonds in well researched, liquid markets, few fund managers can add value. However, for small cap stocks, emerging markets, niche markets, some (but not many) fund managers can add value through stock selection which more than compensates for the fees involved.

Also, there are many asset types for which ETFs are not available - particularly an issue if you don't (for tax reasons) wish to invest in US-based ETFs.

Very much it's horses for courses; sometimes an ETF is the better vehicle, other times an actively managed fund is better.

Is there any reason why you single out certain asset categories and if, as you admit, only a minority of fund managers can 'add value' is there any way the retail investor can reliably identify those few? And if there is no way, would it not be naive to purchase such a fund?

[goatfarmer]

The longer the term of your trade, the better the possibility - - as in buy and hold which is not really trading. Day trading is extremely difficult and seems to take a very distinct and unusual personality in addition to the hard work and naalytical skills that will increase your odds.

You give few specifics but try it out on paper first - then buy mutual funds.

There is no reason to buy mutual funds. Fees are too high. ETFs are a better option.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/06/quotations-on-index-investing-refusing-to-believe-in-magic/

That really is a rather naive attitude. For large cap stocks, government bonds in well researched, liquid markets, few fund managers can add value. However, for small cap stocks, emerging markets, niche markets, some (but not many) fund managers can add value through stock selection which more than compensates for the fees involved.

Also, there are many asset types for which ETFs are not available - particularly an issue if you don't (for tax reasons) wish to invest in US-based ETFs.

Very much it's horses for courses; sometimes an ETF is the better vehicle, other times an actively managed fund is better.

Not all ETFs are constructed in the same way, so it is better to refer to particular ETFs if they are the weapon of choice.

True enough. I would only recommend three ETFs if one has access to a US account: SPY (or VTI), EFA and EEM. This would give the lazy investor a globally diversified portfolio.

[SheungWan]

The longer the term of your trade, the better the possibility - - as in buy and hold which is not really trading. Day trading is extremely difficult and seems to take a very distinct and unusual personality in addition to the hard work and naalytical skills that will increase your odds.

You give few specifics but try it out on paper first - then buy mutual funds.

There is no reason to buy mutual funds. Fees are too high. ETFs are a better option.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/06/quotations-on-index-investing-refusing-to-believe-in-magic/

That really is a rather naive attitude. For large cap stocks, government bonds in well researched, liquid markets, few fund managers can add value. However, for small cap stocks, emerging markets, niche markets, some (but not many) fund managers can add value through stock selection which more than compensates for the fees involved.

Also, there are many asset types for which ETFs are not available - particularly an issue if you don't (for tax reasons) wish to invest in US-based ETFs.

Very much it's horses for courses; sometimes an ETF is the better vehicle, other times an actively managed fund is better.

Is there any reason why you single out certain asset categories and if, as you admit, only a minority of fund managers can 'add value' is there any way the retail investor can reliably identify those few? And if there is no way, would it not be naive to purchase such a fund?

There is no way a retail investor can escape risk, whether choosing sectors, fund managers or individual stocks. And last year's star fund manager may turn out to be this year's dud.

[SheungWan]

Define 'Rich'

Define "trading"

Today's trade will be Barclays on the latest news. Some traders will be looking to see the extent to which the stock goes down (if it does) on the FTSE open. If there is seen to be an over-reaction then there will be some buying and hoping to get the bounce. Risk? Falling knife. Possible gain? A quick 5% on the bounce. So $5k on a $100,000 wager. Up for it?

[AyG]

Is there any reason why you single out certain asset categories and if, as you admit, only a minority of fund managers can 'add value' is there any way the retail investor can reliably identify those few? And if there is no way, would it not be naive to purchase such a fund?

If, for an asset category, there is a lot of research done, there aren't any hidden "gems" for a fund manager to find. This is very much the case for large cap US equities.

For major market government bond funds, the market is so efficient that (broadly speaking) a fund manager simply can't cover the fund fees with superior performance.

As for identifying managers that outperform, there are websites that monitor manager performance throughout their careers. One such UK site is http://www.bestinvest.co.uk/research/manager-research

If you want to do the analysis yourself, you need to look at a minimum of 10-12 years' performance (across the whole economic cycle) and see whether the manager has outperformed against an appropriate benchmark (after charges, taking income into account). Some do.

Of course, past performance is no guarantee of the future, but I'm happy to take the risk with highly experienced managers with a good, long track record.

Of course, things aren't always clear cut. I own EGShares Emerging Markets Core ETF. This goes against much of what I believe. It's an ETF in Emerging Markets (where I believe active management usually outperforms) and it's a US ETF (so I get hit by US tax and end up paying for America's military exploits). However, the country exposure nicely complements that of the actively managed funds I hold (which tend to have an Asian/South American bias), so I feel comfortable with it.

[Lancelot]

Is it really possible to become rich from trading?

Guaranteed.

Skeptical? Continue reading past investment success and totally correct future financial forecasts here on TV,

Most of the folks on TV have made millions in Thailand from trading, real estate and business ownership.Tthey also earned millions back home but came to Thailand to avoid neer-do-wells like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Sir Richard Branson

[AyG]

Is it really possible to become rich from trading?

Guaranteed.

Skeptical? Continue reading past investment success and totally correct future financial forecasts here on TV,

Most of the folks on TV have made millions in Thailand from trading, real estate and business ownership.Tthey also earned millions back home but came to Thailand to avoid neer-do-wells like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Sir Richard Branson

Absolutely. Particularly that Warren Buffet. In the five years to 2013 he underperformed the S&P 500 by a large margin. Pathetic performance. He winges that in the previous 43 5 year periods he outperformed every time, but it's totally clear he's a hopeless loser.

[chockchai12]

I can't find my last post?

Edited June 26, 2014 by chockchai12

[Naam]

Is it really possible to become rich from trading?

Guaranteed.

Skeptical? Continue reading past investment success and totally correct future financial forecasts here on TV,

Most of the folks on TV have made millions in Thailand from trading, real estate and business ownership.Tthey also earned millions back home but came to Thailand to avoid neer-do-wells like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Sir Richard Branson

Absolutely. Particularly that Warren Buffet. In the five years to 2013 he underperformed the S&P 500 by a large margin. Pathetic performance. He winges that in the previous 43 5 year periods he outperformed every time, but it's totally clear he's a hopeless loser.

i wish i owned a small fraction of this loser's billions

[A1Str8]

Anything is possible.

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[NeverSure]

I have lost a lot of money in the stock market by "actively trading." I have made a lot another way, and that way is advocated by more and more investors.

I listen to my gut, and buy only stocks in companies that I do business with. I like them and assume others will. They are newer companies with a lot of either upside or downside potential, but my gut says they will do well. Usually I'm right.

To give some examples, I used to be the manager of a bank in Beaverton Oregon, US. This was perhaps 1970. I was very young and hadn't yet begun to buy stock. One day a young man came in and set down at my desk to borrow money. He had with him a pair of Nike shoes. Not only had I never heard of Nike, but I'd never seen such an "ugly" shoe.

I made the loan only because his credit rating and balance sheet demanded it. He was making a lot of money.

Now, Nike is headquartered in Beaverton Oregon not even a mile from that bank. Had I loved the shoes, and when they soon after went public, and bought some stock based on my gut, I would have made a fortune, and by honest means.

What if I had followed my gut and bought Microsoft and Walmart when they went public? I was already a customer. What about Burger King?

I didn't buy any of those but it taught me a lesson that if I like and use something that much and it has a lot of room for growth, and if it's making a lot of money, I should follow my gut.

I did buy Dollar Store right after the first time I was in one. I went home and looked it up and researched it and called my stock broker. It's worth 6x what I paid for it.

I hold stocks until I think the value might be leveling off, or until I see something else and want to raise cash in my portfolio. I'm a slow, slow investor, sticking with what I believe in and what's working. I rarely buy or sell a stock.

Edited June 26, 2014 by NeverSure

[German Viking]

Sure can you getting rich from trading for example human trafficking

[SheungWan]

There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat. And we must take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.

Shakespeare.

[JacChang]

Is it really possible to become rich from trading?

Guaranteed.

Skeptical? Continue reading past investment success and totally correct future financial forecasts here on TV,

Most of the folks on TV have made millions in Thailand from trading, real estate and business ownership.Tthey also earned millions back home but came to Thailand to avoid neer-do-wells like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Sir Richard Branson

Absolutely. Particularly that Warren Buffet. In the five years to 2013 he underperformed the S&P 500 by a large margin. Pathetic performance. He winges that in the previous 43 5 year periods he outperformed every time, but it's totally clear he's a hopeless loser.

I would give more respect to that man.

It really doesn't matter who drives their car the fastest. Who reaches that place first. Then one day that guy crashed and died. And this "old turtle" always arrives, every single year, for as long as he lives. Where's that loud guy now?

Very rarely do we define success in investing by boasting to others by percentage values. "OH I made 12% in just a month!" Investors can only frown and say "gamblers". What we are looking for is success over the years to come. What Buffet failed to achieve in highest percentage gains, he supremely won every other human being in terms of perseverance. His stocks selections will generally stand with a strong foundation.

[copa8]

Some day-traders may say yes, especially if you have a tolerance for risk,

it's possible to get rich, but chances of that happening are like winning the lotto. there's a higher chance of making a living from trading, though. i've been trading ES full-time for about 2 years now. barely covering living expenses with what i make (still a 1 lot piker). but i'm living in one of the most expensive cities in the world. would be a different matter, if i move to a lower cost of living place like thailand or belize.

[copa8]

I agree with nearly all the comments here. To make big money, you need to be rich before you start. (That is why banks dominate the markets.)

But if you DO have say 100k to throw away (in other words, the stock market is like a casino...you have to be prepared to LOSE and not worry about the money you have just lost), you can make money.

One aspect of trading might make you money on a regular basis: choose a bank or oil or gold company and follow its trading pattern for a few months. You need to find a company whose shares trade in the millions (very liquid therefore) and in a volatile situation (oil and gold, for x). Also choose a company that pays a dividend of about 5/6%, so that if your trade gets frozen at too high a price, you can still pick up a dividend until the price comes back up.

So, say Citi Bank's shares are $100 and you have $100k. So, at 9.30 am (ET) you buy 1000 shares of Citi Bank at $100. By 11am the shares have gone up to $101 or 1%. You sell your 1000 shares at $101 and now have made a profit of $1000 in a few short hours. Hard work.

But if Citi B has gone down to say $95, you can still hold on, confident that you will at the very least be able to pick up a dividend payment of $5000 per annum. As I say, this will not make you rich, but at least you are minimising your losses.

But note, you are not going to get super rich that way. If you can make that trade just once a week, you would make about $50,000, which is not at all rich in NY, but would be super duper rich in Thailand......

Bt1.6 mil a year is super duper rich?? Ha ha ha.

I think he said "once a week", which would mean $50k x 52 = $2.6 million or Bht83.2 million per year. So, yeah...that's super duper rich...at least for me.

[Naam]

I agree with nearly all the comments here. To make big money, you need to be rich before you start. (That is why banks dominate the markets.)

But if you DO have say 100k to throw away (in other words, the stock market is like a casino...you have to be prepared to LOSE and not worry about the money you have just lost), you can make money.

One aspect of trading might make you money on a regular basis: choose a bank or oil or gold company and follow its trading pattern for a few months. You need to find a company whose shares trade in the millions (very liquid therefore) and in a volatile situation (oil and gold, for x). Also choose a company that pays a dividend of about 5/6%, so that if your trade gets frozen at too high a price, you can still pick up a dividend until the price comes back up.

So, say Citi Bank's shares are $100 and you have $100k. So, at 9.30 am (ET) you buy 1000 shares of Citi Bank at $100. By 11am the shares have gone up to $101 or 1%. You sell your 1000 shares at $101 and now have made a profit of $1000 in a few short hours. Hard work.

But if Citi B has gone down to say $95, you can still hold on, confident that you will at the very least be able to pick up a dividend payment of $5000 per annum. As I say, this will not make you rich, but at least you are minimising your losses.

But note, you are not going to get super rich that way. If you can make that trade just once a week, you would make about $50,000, which is not at all rich in NY, but would be super duper rich in Thailand......

Bt1.6 mil a year is super duper rich?? Ha ha ha.

I think he said "once a week", which would mean $50k x 52 = $2.6 million or Bht83.2 million per year. So, yeah...that's super duper rich...at least for me.

pardon me Sir, but where exactly are the $50k/week hidden in your statement?

So, say Citi Bank's shares are $100 and you have $100k. So, at 9.30 am (ET) you buy 1000 shares of Citi Bank at $100. By 11am the shares have gone up to $101 or 1%. You sell your 1000 shares at $101 and now have made a profit of $1000 in a few short hours. Hard work.

If you can make that trade just once a week, you would make about $50,000

i see only $1,000/week. will the Tooth Fairy come up with the remaining $49k every week?

[timewilltell]

I agree with nearly all the comments here. To make big money, you need to be rich before you start. (That is why banks dominate the markets.)

But if you DO have say 100k to throw away (in other words, the stock market is like a casino...you have to be prepared to LOSE and not worry about the money you have just lost), you can make money.

One aspect of trading might make you money on a regular basis: choose a bank or oil or gold company and follow its trading pattern for a few months. You need to find a company whose shares trade in the millions (very liquid therefore) and in a volatile situation (oil and gold, for x). Also choose a company that pays a dividend of about 5/6%, so that if your trade gets frozen at too high a price, you can still pick up a dividend until the price comes back up.

So, say Citi Bank's shares are $100 and you have $100k. So, at 9.30 am (ET) you buy 1000 shares of Citi Bank at $100. By 11am the shares have gone up to $101 or 1%. You sell your 1000 shares at $101 and now have made a profit of $1000 in a few short hours. Hard work.

But if Citi B has gone down to say $95, you can still hold on, confident that you will at the very least be able to pick up a dividend payment of $5000 per annum. As I say, this will not make you rich, but at least you are minimising your losses.

But note, you are not going to get super rich that way. If you can make that trade just once a week, you would make about $50,000, which is not at all rich in NY, but would be super duper rich in Thailand......

Bt1.6 mil a year is super duper rich?? Ha ha ha.

I think he said "once a week", which would mean $50k x 52 = $2.6 million or Bht83.2 million per year. So, yeah...that's super duper rich...at least for me.

pardon me Sir, but where exactly are the $50k/week hidden in your statement?

So, say Citi Bank's shares are $100 and you have $100k. So, at 9.30 am (ET) you buy 1000 shares of Citi Bank at $100. By 11am the shares have gone up to $101 or 1%. You sell your 1000 shares at $101 and now have made a profit of $1000 in a few short hours. Hard work.

If you can make that trade just once a week, you would make about $50,000

i see only $1,000/week. will the Tooth Fairy come up with the remaining $49k every week?

It doesn't say $50,000 a week to says if you do that trade once a week you would have $50,000 which I think is pretty clear equates to $50,000 per year. I did pretty much what was described last night in 39 minutes. Of course not every one is a winner and you do need to know what you are doing, spend a lot of time learning and keep learning. You will never be consistent just jumping into trades without planning and you will never be able to make effective plans without learning. It is a job, which much like any other job needs training. This particular job needs dedication as well and requires you to look deeply inside yourself, recognize your faults and fix them. That journey leads you in many eye opening personal revelations about life and your own perception of money as it relates to life as well.

It's said 90% of people who come in to the market lose and most lose because they can't db bothered to learn or don't even realize you need to. Most people are quite lazy, 50% or so are below average intelligence, a large percentage do not have the required personality skills or are unable to develop the mindset needed and I would say 90% do not understand probability.

How many people are great poker players? And how many of them understand probability on a deep level?

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

[Lancelot]

Is it really possible to become rich from trading?

Guaranteed.

Skeptical? Continue reading past investment success and totally correct future financial forecasts here on TV,

Most of the folks on TV have made millions in Thailand from trading, real estate and business ownership.Tthey also earned millions back home but came to Thailand to avoid neer-do-wells like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Sir Richard Branson

Absolutely. Particularly that Warren Buffet. In the five years to 2013 he underperformed the S&P 500 by a large margin. Pathetic performance. He winges that in the previous 43 5 year periods he outperformed every time, but it's totally clear he's a hopeless loser.

i wish i owned a small fraction of this loser's billions

I was joking Ayg- I hope you were as well

Edited June 29, 2014 by Lancelot