planning for a setup, then not executing it when it happened, just for it to run up hard the next day without a position is just so maddening... disappointed sometimes...
Airmass says anyone can turn $100K into $3,500,000
“I went into $META at the 2022 bottom where it was absolutely obvious and safe. I carried that position with around 4.5X leverage because it was so cheap and it just kept going up in a straight line”
“I built that position around $90 and I ended up getting out around $680. With the leverage, that turns into roughly a 30x to 35x return”
“If you were a trader with just $100K, which most people can get access to, I don’t care, take out a credit card, business loan, whatever. Anyone can gain access”
“So let’s say you turn that $100K into $3.5M in about three years. I believe that beats 70%+ annual returns doing nothing at all, without that grind”
@Bl4ngk intraday it was flipping dVWAP and 1D-rVWAP, with confluence of wVAL / pwVAL / pdVAL, so potential signs of reclaim for me
flows could change from NYO, you're right, once the NYO highs were taken again, it was probably shifting from balance to trend, taking out 80.5k at least
$BTC long
mean reversion from last night which I decided to hold due to monthly value rotation🫡
bias: intraday bearish, mVAL bullish
entry: dVAL sd2
confluence: mVAL / orderflow puke / 2W cVAH
I faded opportunities to compound today post NYO (annotations in chart)
I took a scratch on the 1st trade which I longed at pwVAL but momentum continued down
forgot to share TPO confluence
this is a great lesson on why after a big trending day, it is good to wait for balance to form on the next day, with higher EV long setups for mean reversions
Trading is three pillars: a data-driven edge, risk management, and psychology. Each one is roughly as important as the others. Most people who fail aren't failing because of psychology in isolation.
They're failing because they've got a weak edge, no real position-sizing framework, and the psychological wear is what shows up first in the equity curve.
Strip the edge out and the calmest mindset in the world won't print money. Strip the risk framework out and even a real edge gets wiped on the first sharp drawdown. The mind is what carries you through a 4-week losing stretch you've already proven, statistically, the strategy can survive. It's not what generates the alpha.
The £1000 psychology course doesn't say that. It can't. The product would shrink. So you get 12-week programmes on managing fear, journaling drills, breathing exercises, and very little on whether your edge actually exists or your sizing is calibrated to your statistics.
Where the actual ROI sits, in my experience: networking with traders, fund managers, and people running real businesses.
I've learnt more from one good conversation with a working PM than from any paid course.
If you want to work on psychology, fine. Work on it. Read the books. Journal the trades. But don't outsource the diagnosis to someone who is selling one product and has every incentive to tell you it's the only thing missing.
Edge × conviction × size.
Psychology is what holds the conviction together. It doesn't replace the edge or the sizing.
@docXBT love the repetition/routine approach which i've been influenced to do the same!
would you think there are trade offs to not trade alts with relative strength setups? or you prefer the consistency and do not see a point at the stage you're at?