=== SUMMARY ===
- Post questions the claim that all indicators have ~50% win rate and asks whether risk management, not indicator selection, is the real edge.
- Author has spent a year seeking an edge and is confused how risk management alone can create profitability after fees/spread.
- Not a researched thesis; it is a beginner/intermediate seeking clarification on trading philosophy and edge construction.
- Quality assessment: Speculation/noise — no data, backtests, or actionable strategy provided; primarily conceptual discussion.
=== SENTIMENT ===
NEUTRAL
=== TRADE IDEAS ===
No actionable trade ideas in this post.
Оценка15
Комментарии29
% апвоутов83%
▶ Полный текст поста
I read this comment in this subreddit:
“All indicators have around 50% WR, but how you enter and exit it is what matters.”
They additionally stated risk management is more important. Can someone elaborate more on what this means? Let’s say if this is true, doesn’t fees and spread make it sub 50? Also aren’t some combinations of indicators more profitable than others?
Let’s say we entered a trade by some very simple indicator like ema or macd, and had good risk management, theoretically that would be enough of to be profitable if this statement is true. I’ve tried various simple to complex indicators. Would those strategies be saved if I had better risk management? But isn’t that having a good sharpe ratio and managing drawdown? Also how could risk management be an edge? That’s my main point of confusion to be honest.
Been looking to find an edge for a year now, but still having a hard time. If someone can elaborate on this or even give a hint towards what I should be doing/focusing on, that would be very appreciated.