Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Please cite your source for this. I know lots of traders THINK they need 1:3 risk to reward, but that does not mean this is a successful RR to have.
I'd much rather have a 1:2 risk to reward with 40% winning trades than 1:3 risk to reward with 25% winning trades, just as an example. I'd also rather have a 2:1 risk to reward if I had a 70% chance of winning comapred to 1:3 with 25% wins.
Your edge is underdeveloped or you stopped developing as a trader, and risk of ruin is high if you do not see at least 1:3 trades all over the place. If you see and do not place and take those you have emotional problems.
I can just speak for myself . It is the path you go down when you start your trading journey . I had unreal goals . Under estimated how difficult the journey would be or how long it would take . Trusted trading educators that can not trade as well. I think my biggest mistake was starting of day trading first . It is like starting collage with out a elementary education . After year three I went back and got a swing trading education and swing traded until I was profitable doing that . To my surprise things that did not work well on a small time frame chart worked on the larger time frames . I also seen there was no real need for holy grail domes or footprint charting . A lot of the time and money I wasted the first three years was on unnecessary stuff because I skipped elementary school and started collage . I did not know any better .
If you risk $1 for a reward of $3 then, what I call the profit factor (size of wins vs size of losses), is 3. I think we can agree to this. Now, if you lose 75% of your trades and win the rest, you are still losing in spite of the high profit factor.
Another way:
Lets say over 100 trades, your win ratio was 25% and your risk/reward was 1:3.
You won 25 trades making $3 each = $75.
You lost 75 trades losing $1 each = -$75.
Net you lost after commissions.
@kevinkdog is right. By itself win ratio or risk/reward means nothing. You have to look at them together.
OK, when you say risk:reward of 1:3 is good, you are including some undefined win% percentage in the scenario that makes the math work out for a profitable strategy. That makes sense.
I actually had a question, if using "Scrying" can help you look into the future, you should have a 100% win rate on your trades, right? what's stopping you from becoming a multi-billionaire then?
the larger the RR the lower the win rate is in most systems . you can have a profitable system with a 30 % win rate . however you will all ways have larger draw downs with lower win rates . even with a 50 % win rate you can have 10 to 15 L in a row . few traders can handle that mentally because it stops them from leveraging up . so they can not make the income they dreamed about . so the trader goes searching for a system that does not exist . 80% winners at 3 to 1 RR with little draw down .