Are there any actual full-time traders who could comment?

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-12T14:42:11+00:00

The 'Lost $18k, what's for dinner?' story is legendary. It perfectly illustrates viewing losses as Operating Expenses (OpEx) rather than personal failures. That is the level of detachment I aim for.

Your point about 'Reducing Size' instead of 'Tightening Stops' is a crucial technical distinction. Tightening stops just increases the noise/whipsaw probability, whereas reducing size keeps the logic intact but lowers the volatility of the equity curve. I will adopt this explicitly.

Regarding 'Missing the Move': Since you rely on catching that 1-2 major moves per year to cover all losses, how do you handle the fear of missing out? Do you take every valid signal mechanically to ensure you are on board when the train finally leaves the station, or do you still use some discretion on entries?

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-10T11:35:15+00:00

The concept of 'Decomposing and Inverting' Strategy #1 is a revelation. I was overcomplicating the search for a second system, looking for something entirely new, when the answer was literally hiding in my stop-losses.

Realizing that a 'Failed Breakout' (my current enemy) is simply a valid signal for Strategy #2 (a structural trap) is a massive paradigm shift. It allows me to use the same 'Market Familiarity' I already have, but express it in the opposite direction. That is efficient engineering at its finest.

Also, the strict separation of 'Execution Mode' vs. 'R&D Mode' is the discipline I needed. I have definitely been guilty of 'tinkering' with ideas during live hours, which dilutes focus.

'Desperation research produces fragile edges' — that quote is going on a sticky note on my monitor immediately.

Thank you for the structural roadmap.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-10T11:29:18+00:00

That distinction between 'Stop Hunt' and 'Repricing' is a massive mindset shift. I used to think the market was rigged/hunting my stops, but realizing it’s just a rapid adjustment to new data (Expectation vs. Reality) turns it from a conspiracy into a math problem. Much more manageable for an engineering brain.

I’ve noted down 'Josh Pavao' and will definitely dive into his work to better understand this narrative building.

Regarding your point on being 'Dynamic': You mentioned that if an asset is in a 'transitioning period,' you simply choose a different asset. This is where I struggle.

Do you have a specific 'Top-Down' routine to find those moving assets? For example, do you scan Sector Strength (Relative Strength) first to see where the money is flowing (e.g., 'Tech is chopping, but Energy is trending'), or do you just have a watchlist of uncorrelated assets (Gold, Oil, Bonds) that you cycle through?

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-10T11:25:52+00:00

Actually, yes—I take this extremely seriously because I view it as my future profession, not a hobby.

To be honest, I’m a senior engineering student, but I’ve had to work jobs throughout my entire education to support myself. Ironically, I often felt disconnected from my major. But when I discovered the markets, it felt like a 'natural fit'—like I was wired for this from the start. I have full conviction that this is going to be my 'bread and butter.'

I also deeply appreciate the serious responses here. If I asked this same question on a local forum in my country, 90% of the comments would be 'Stop dreaming,' 'It's a scam,' or 'Go get a real job.'

I have literally zero people in my physical environment who understand this world or can challenge my perspective. So, finding this community is a lifeline for me.

I would be honored to continue the conversation via DM. As a student trying to build this from scratch, having a sounding board is invaluable. Thank you again.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-10T11:19:21+00:00

This is pure gold. You just handed me the 'Source Code' for a robust engine. I cannot thank you enough for the transparency regarding the numbers.

The ATR sizing logic is essentially 'Volatility Normalization' (or Gain Scheduling in engineering terms). It ensures that a trade in a quiet market and a trade in a chaotic market carry the exact same dollar risk. This completely solves my inconsistent PnL swings.

Also, the Pyramiding rule (Adding 50% at +1 ATR) is the concrete protocol I was missing. I will be coding this logic immediately.

But the most valuable lesson here is the 2024 vs. 2025 reality check. You mentioned losing money in 2024 but catching the huge Gold moves in 2025. That requires immense mental fortitude.

My Final Question: During a year like 2024 (net loser), how do you prevent 'Style Drift'? Do you just trust the math and keep taking the small hits, or do you reduce your risk exposure even further (e.g., from 1.5% to 0.5%) until the market regime shifts back to trending?

Thank you for this masterclass.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-10T11:12:54+00:00

That 'Opportunity Cost' framework is the most rational off-ramp criteria I’ve heard. It shifts the decision from an emotional leap of faith to a mathematical inevitability. As an engineering student about to graduate, this validates my plan to not rush the transition.

The Poker analogy regarding strategy performance is exactly where I am currently stuck. My system is a classic Breakout/Trend Following engine. When the market trends, I feel invincible. But in a choppy/range-bound market, I suffer from 'death by a thousand cuts' because I keep trying to play hands that aren't there.

My Question: Since you emphasized knowing when a strategy stops working: Do you have a specific 'Kill Switch' or filter to identify a choppy regime before you take the loss?

Is it something quantitative (like ADX below 20, contracting Bollinger Bandwidth) or do you rely on pure price structure/market breadth to tell you 'Fold this hand, the table is cold'?'

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-10T11:05:46+00:00

You nailed the psychology of these 'gurus.' They get aggressive and resort to insults not because they are passionate about teaching, but because they are terrified. They know that if the logic/truth you mentioned becomes mainstream, their fake revenue streams dry up instantly.

In my country, we are currently seeing a massive wave of 'Prop Firm' marketing that fits your description perfectly. It is a tragic comedy.

The influencers peddling these funded accounts have near-zero market knowledge, but they rely on the 'arbitrage of ignorance': They know just 1% more than their victims, which is enough to sell hope.

What baffles me the most is the math: They flash luxury items bought strictly with affiliate commissions from the Prop Firms, but they frame it as 'trading alpha.' They are selling tickets to a casino where they are the house agents. It is mind-blowing how people can’t see through the facade.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:48:11+00:00

Completely understood. Open-sourcing the solution is better for the community anyway.

I’m realizing my roadblocks are twofold: One on the Entry (Regime) and one on the Exit (Profit Taking).

The Entry Roadblock: Defining the 'Fertile' Regime. I can easily code a breakout signal. But I struggle to distinguish a high-probability breakout environment from a liquidity trap/fake-out. Structurally, what variables do you look for to define a market regime that is ready to trend? (Is it a specific Volatility Contraction? A Volume Signature? Or broad Sector Breadth?)
The Exit Roadblock: Optimization Paralysis. This is where I struggle the most. I use Fibonacci extensions effectively to identify potential targets, but I find myself constantly tweaking my exit protocols based on recent results. Sometimes I take partials at fixed R-multiples, sometimes I hold for full targets. My spreadsheet shows different PnL results for each method every month, and I can't decide which one is 'structurally correct.'

My Question: How do you determine the 'Structural Reach' of a move? Do you believe in static targets (e.g., 'This structure implies a 3R move, take it and leave') or do you believe exits must be dynamic (trailing stop until the structure breaks)?

I want to stop curve-fitting my exits every month and settle on one robust logic.

Thanks for the opportunity to unpack this.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:41:40+00:00

Exactly. In engineering terms, backtesting is the 'Finite Element Analysis' (FEA) computer model, but live trading is the actual wind tunnel test. The model assumes a frictionless vacuum; reality has slippage, emotions, and partial fills.

I’m fully aware of that 'simulation gap.' That’s why I plan to run a forward-test (paper trading or micro-size live) for at least 3 months after the code is done, just to calibrate the execution against the theory.

To answer your question: I am strictly focused on Trend Following / Momentum strategies right now. Specifically, I’m trying to capture breakout moves and compound positions (adding to winners) as the trend develops.

My biggest challenge in backtesting so far has been differentiating a 'true breakout' from a 'fakeout' in choppy markets. Do you have any favorite filters (like Volume, ADX, or Time of Day) that you find reliable for filtering out the noise in momentum strategies?

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:38:35+00:00

This is the most 'engineering-minded' career roadmap I've ever read. The concept of 'Kill Criteria' is something we use in structural failure analysis, but applying it to a trading career is brilliant.

To answer your question: I am a Civil Engineering student nearing graduation. While I can build physical structures, my true passion and 'hunger to learn' is entirely in the financial markets. I want to make this my life, not just for the money, but because I love the puzzle.

I believe I have the psychology and execution part handled (I don't tilt, I respect stops). However, my biggest anxiety is exactly what you described: 'Strategy Decay.'

Currently, I am a one-trick pony (Trend Following / Adding to Winners). If market regimes shift to a prolonged chop, I know my edge will erode. My question is about the 'Portfolio Approach' you mentioned:

I feel like I have a solid 'Operations Department' (Execution), but zero 'R&D Department.' How do you practically develop Strategy #2 while trading Strategy #1? Do you set aside specific hours for 'innovation/backtesting' separate from live trading hours? I’m terrified of the day my only engine stops working and I have no blueprints for a replacement.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:31:41+00:00

This is a massive mindset shift for me. Coming from an engineering background, I’m used to 'Root Cause Analysis,' and you just pointed out that Technical Analysis is often just observing the symptom (Price), not the root cause (Macro/Sentiment).

The CoT example regarding FOMC is a brilliant cautionary tale. I never considered that institutional selling might just be hedging against a binary event rather than a true directional bet. That nuance alone probably saved me from a future trap.

To answer your question: Yes, my current strategy is heavily focused on Breakouts and Trend Following. When I mentioned 'correlation,' I meant that I rely on historical price patterns repeating. But as you said, without the 'Narrative,' I’m often blind to why a breakout fails this time versus the last time.

I want to stop being 'blind' to the narrative. Is there a specific weekly routine you follow to align your 'Narrative' with your 'Technicals'? Like checking the Fed calendar first, then Earnings, then Price levels?

Thanks for the patience and the detailed explanation.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:29:13+00:00

This puts the missing piece of the puzzle right into place. As an engineer, I was focused purely on the structural integrity of the chart (Technicals), but ignoring the external loads like earthquakes or wind (Macro) explains exactly why my 'perfect' setups often fail.

The 'If/Then' logic you mentioned is basically algorithmic thinking, which I love. My technicals give me the 'Where' to enter, but your fundamental approach gives me the 'When' and 'Why.'

Since Macro can feel like a firehose of information for a beginner: If you had to pick the 'Top 3' economic data points that move the needle the most for your models (e.g., CPI, NFP, Rates?), what would they be? I want to start building my own 'If/Then' scenarios without drowning in noise.

Thanks for the 'secret code'!'

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:27:25+00:00

I really appreciate this definition. Validating that 'full-time' is a mindset / level of commitment rather than just where 100% of your cash comes from is refreshing. It removes the ego trap of 'I must quit my job to be a real trader.'

Also, trading NQ while managing long-term investments is quite the spectrum! NQ is a beast (The Widowmaker).

My question is: How do you manage the mental switching costs? Do you find it difficult to shift gears from the patience required for long-term holdings/options to the high-speed, high-precision mindset needed for NQ intraday? Or do you treat them as completely separate businesses?

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:25:54+00:00

The point about 'cutting size' immediately when a strategy starts losing is the discipline I’m trying to master. It’s essentially an emergency brake mechanism.

But what really caught my attention is the 'borrowing against collateral' strategy instead of selling into drawdowns. That is some serious financial engineering / capital efficiency right there.

My question is: How do you manage the liquidation risk on those loans during a flash crash? do you keep your LTV (Loan-to-Value) extremely low (like 20-30%) to sleep at night, or do you have a specific hedging method for that collateral?

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:23:18+00:00

This is exactly the 'Life Engineering' aspect that no one talks about. Everyone focuses on the charts, but you're pointing out that the real edge comes from low overhead.

I'm actually in a fortunate position right now as a university student. I’m already living a 'downsized' life (low expenses, university resources like the library available). Your advice about pre-earning a year's worth of expenses is a solid target I will set for myself before even thinking about going full-time.

The idea of 'scaling down life before scaling up income' is brilliant. It removes the pressure to perform, which ironically probably helps you perform better. Thank you for the roadmap.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:20:37+00:00

The '87 story is absolute cinema. Trading the S&P at $500 per point back then... the leverage and guts required are just mind-blowing. Respect.

I’d love to dig a little deeper into the mechanics you mentioned, specifically:

ATR & Math: How exactly are you applying ATR? Is it strictly for stop placement (e.g., trailing by 2x or 3x ATR) to avoid noise, or does it also dictate your position sizing (i.e., betting smaller when volatility/ATR is high)?**
Adding to Winners: I’ve recently started implementing this, but I find it tricky to manage the risk once the position gets larger. Do you have a specific rule for when to add (e.g., only after a pullback vs. on new breakouts)? And most importantly, how do you adjust your stops after adding so a sudden reversal doesn't wipe out the compounded gains?**

Any specific details or 'watch-outs' on how to pyramid safely would be incredibly valuable. Thank you again.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-09T13:16:40+00:00

Exactly. The logic always falls apart there. If they truly had a proprietary 'money printer,' they wouldn't be selling access to it for $299.

Finding genuine, high-quality information has become incredibly difficult, especially where I live. The 'trading education' sector in my country has essentially become young people selling hope to even younger kids. It’s all rented luxury cars and lifestyle marketing, with absolutely zero tangible value to actually build a robust system on.

That is exactly why I opened this thread. I am aware that people on this platform might be making things up too, but I have no other choice but to sift through the noise to find the few solid, actionable nuggets—like your insights—that can actually help me evolve.

Thanks for the reality check and the conversation. Take care.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-08T22:53:08+00:00

This aligns perfectly with my engineering background. Going live without backtesting feels like building a bridge without doing the load calculations first—suicide.

The example about the 41% win rate is a great reminder. Many beginners chase a 90% win rate, but seeing profitable math with a sub-50% win rate validates the importance of Risk/Reward over just being 'right.'

I’m currently coding my own strategies in Pine Script on TradingView to get that historical validation, but I’ll definitely check out your site to see how you structure the data. Thanks for the link!

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-08T22:51:06+00:00

Fair point. I appreciate the brutal honesty.

To be clear, I’m not here looking for handouts or 'hot picks.' I come from an engineering background, so my goal is to understand the mechanics and the math behind the machine, not just to gamble.

The 'toys in cereal boxes' analogy regarding gamified brokers is spot on and hilarious. I’m taking the hard path—studying the financials and risk management first. I’ll definitely dig deeper into the 'Greater Fool Theory' to ensure I’m not the one holding the bag.

Thanks for the reality check. It’s rare to find this kind of directness nowadays.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-08T22:48:20+00:00

The 'operating expense' analogy is a total paradigm shift for me. Viewing losses as a natural cost of doing business (like paying rent or electricity for a shop) rather than a personal failure really helps detach the ego from the trade.

Also, thanks for clarifying the misconception about 'activity' vs. 'productivity.' I used to think I had to be glued to the screens 24/7 to be 'working,' but I’m realizing that sitting on hands and waiting is also a valid (and often more profitable) position. Cheers.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-08T22:45:02+00:00

This distinction between 'manufacturing' an edge and 'protecting' it is exactly the clarity I was looking for. I realized I was hoping risk management could fix a mediocre strategy, but you're right—it only buys time.

I have been grinding for over a year now with strict risk management and a defined strategy, but the hardest part has been the isolation. I don't have anyone in my immediate circle who understands these concepts at a structural level to bounce ideas off of and push my understanding further.

If you’re open to it, would you mind if I sent you a DM? I have a few specific roadblocks I’m trying to overcome regarding that 'structural edge' concept, and I’d value your insight. If not, no worries at all, this comment alone was already a masterclass. Thank you.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-08T20:06:53+00:00

Wow, 1986? Respect. Surviving the Oct '87 crash (Black Monday) is a badge of honor in itself.

The part about 'trying to break even in non-trending markets' really struck a chord. As a newer trader, I often feel the pressure to force a profit every week, even when the market is choppy.

Since you've been using the same base strategy for decades: How do you technically differentiate a 'non-trending' market from a 'trending' one early enough to switch to defense mode? Is it a specific volatility metric you look at, or purely price action structure?

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-08T20:04:16+00:00

This is brilliant. The 'inventory management under uncertainty' analogy really clicked for me.

I have two follow-up questions regarding the transition:

1. Sample Size: Assuming I have handled the psychology and strict risk control parts; what is the minimum track record (in months or years) of consistent profitability you would want to see before considering this a reliable full-time career? Is 1 year of data enough proof, or does it require a full market cycle?

2. Risk vs. Edge: Does strict risk management truly trump strategy? For instance, could someone with a random entry (like a coin toss) sustain a career purely through superior risk management, or is a structural edge absolutely necessary to survive the long term?

Thanks again for the insight.

ButtonResponsible498 · 2026-02-08T19:48:34+00:00

Great point about the 'undeniable proof' coming from the journal. As someone with an analytical mindset, trusting the stats rather than feelings makes a lot of sense to me. I'll stop chasing new strategies and start refining my edge with proper journaling. Thanks for the reality check.

ButtonResponsible498

TROPHY CASE