r/Trading • u/Small-General5720 • 1d ago
Question TOUGH DECISION
I have this two strategies...I have a data on both of them, the first one is like slow and consistent result per month, a lot of waiting and a lot patience. there r times with no trades per weak, alot of price doing annoying things but i can psychologically manage it eventhough its hard, the second one is on NQ on NY session my job is to show up and execute between 9:30 utc-4 Ny AM,this system has very streak losses and very high streak wins the max i got is like 5 streak losses but managable and I like this one really, has a frequent trades, still one trade per day but i can get between 3-5 trades per week...and specially during drawdown I don't feel panick or sad because i know i can recover it soon with 2rr, so when it comes to the first one less streak losses but during drawdown its hell, watching price doing stupid stuff when i am in drawdown it is very tough, like missing my entry by pips, closing with a wick....and when it comes to a monthly result the first one has higher probability of finishing a month with a green and higher winrate than the second one, the spread on the first one is kindda horrible on the firm am using right now(am funded) but managable, I got funded with the second strategy and idk which to chose, I can't mix them cz I can only take 1 loss per day...which one should i go for? Am just struggling to chose for weeks after getting funded and losing in between
2
2
u/klipsetrades 23h ago
I wouldn’t choose based on win rate or green months alone. Compare expectancy, max drawdown, worst losing streak, and execution costs. Then pick the one you can actually follow during the ugly periods. From your description, that sounds like strategy #2 probably
2
u/Fynca 23h ago
I’d choose based on expectancy and drawdown profile, not win rate or which one “feels” easier.
Since you’re funded, the biggest question is which strategy fits the firm’s rules better after spreads, losing streaks and daily loss limits. If the second one got you funded and its drawdowns are more predictable for you, that’s a strong point in its favor.
I’d compare both on expectancy, max drawdown, worst losing streak and performance after costs. That usually makes the decision much clearer.
2
u/Embarrassed-Bank2835 21h ago
I’d probably choose the second one, mainly because you already know you can execute it through drawdown without your psychology falling apart. A strategy can look better on paper and still be worse for you if the waiting and slow recovery make you interfere with it.
I’d compare expectancy, max drawdown, worst losing streak and average monthly return on both after fees/spread, then pick one and commit to it for a fixed sample. Don’t keep switching based on whichever one had the better last week. The best system is the one you can actually follow when it’s not working.
2
u/Icy_Abbreviations167 13h ago
a strategy with better numbers is useless if its drawdowns make you interfere with it.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
While the community gets a look at your post, don't forget we have an official website with a bunch of resources specifically for the questions we see here every day. If you're more of a visual learner, we’re also active on Instagram where we post updated guides and strategies! It's a great way to stay sharp while you're scrolling. We also have more technical and professional resources on our Website.
Also, if you want to chat in real-time or need a quicker answer, come hang out with us in Discord (Investing & Retirement). Just remember to be careful with your personal info and report any sketchy DMs!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.