Without actually doing the math, its quite simple. if you hit a 48% drawdown you will need to hit almost 100% gain to break even (that is return back to normal). If strategy 1 is 12% drawdown you need about 15% gain to hit break even again. So of course strategy 1 is the best!
Have a look at this table as an example:
https://allstarcharts.com/priority1managerisk/
The more risk you take the bigger return you will need to recover.
X

Originally posted by whitenWow so much of negativity on www.triangularfx.com, guys chat with them as I have only made good profits with them and they have one of the best post customer support service I have dealt with in recent times.
Leave a comment:

Originally posted by Mahbub Kafi View PostAggressive traders are the sufferer mainly, since they use higher trading lot size, so when they lose any single trade, then they lose huge! Even, Forex business is not gambling or any type money machine! So, stop searching quick success here! All successful Forex traders dont worry about risk management as they follow money management policies so strongly! 2% is a standard risk reward ratio in Forex (per trade).
or totally confused, I'm not sure which
I would think 2% is purely RISK without any reward or ratio required
for risk reward ratio, perhaps you better study some more on babypips school
Leave a comment:

Aggressive traders are the sufferer mainly, since they use higher trading lot size, so when they lose any single trade, then they lose huge! Even, Forex business is not gambling or any type money machine! So, stop searching quick success here! All successful Forex traders don’t worry about risk management as they follow money management policies so strongly! 2% is a standard risk reward ratio in Forex (per trade).
Leave a comment:

Originally posted by cprcrack View PostI invented the following values just for the example. Imagine I have an strategy with this expected outcome:
Strategy 1x:
 Monthly gain: 4%
 Expected drawdown: 12%
My understanding is that if I copytrade that strategy with a risk multiplier based on account equity of 4x, this will be the expected outcome:
Strategy 4x:
 Monthly gain: 16%
 Expected drawdown: 48%
Now suppose that at any given point both strategies have an equity of 10,000$. Then suddenly the max drawdown of both strategies is reached, so Strategy 1x reaches 8,800$ (12% drawdown) and Strategy 4x reaches 5,200$ (48% drawdown). After reaching this max drawdown, the strategies start performing well and reach their expected monthly gains exactly and consistently until they both reach 10,000$ again.
Based on the previous statements I would expect something like seen in equity graph A below, where the green line is Strategy 1x and the red line is Strategy 4x:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1136[/ATTACH]
However, actual calculations tell me that's not gonna happen. Actual calculations tell me that it will take more time to reach 10,000$ again to the Strategy 4x, that is the red line in graph B above.
The way I calculated it is as follows:
Strategy 1x: 8800 * 1.04^x = 10000, where x is the months until reaching 10,000$ > x = 3,26 months
Strategy 2x: 5200 * 1.16^x = 10000, where x is the months until reaching 10,000$ > x = 4,41 months (more time!)
At this point I'm totally confused about what would really happen, A or B, and I hope someone can put some light on the matter.
It's pretty hard to understand your question since your explanation uses a combination of Strategy 1x, 2x, 4x and your graph uses A/B.
It is my understanding that both strategies will recover in the same time frame provided your lot sizes are based on the account balance (not equity) and that no trades are closed while the account is in drawdown.
If a trade is closed then your balance depletes, in which case it will take longer for your higher risk account to recover because you're now trading off a smaller base.
If you lose 50% of your account, you then need to generate a 100% return just to get back to break even.
Leave a comment:

Interesting read...but PLEASE remember that you spell lose just like that, lose. You can lose your money from being loose with your money. So many people get this wrong.
 1 like
Leave a comment:

How risk multiplier really affects monthly gains and drawdowns, help needed!
I invented the following values just for the example. Imagine I have an strategy with this expected outcome:
Strategy 1x:
 Monthly gain: 4%
 Expected drawdown: 12%
My understanding is that if I copytrade that strategy with a risk multiplier based on account equity of 4x, this will be the expected outcome:
Strategy 4x:
 Monthly gain: 16%
 Expected drawdown: 48%
Now suppose that at any given point both strategies have an equity of 10,000$. Then suddenly the max drawdown of both strategies is reached, so Strategy 1x reaches 8,800$ (12% drawdown) and Strategy 4x reaches 5,200$ (48% drawdown). After reaching this max drawdown, the strategies start performing well and reach their expected monthly gains exactly and consistently until they both reach 10,000$ again.
Based on the previous statements I would expect something like seen in equity graph A below, where the green line is Strategy 1x and the red line is Strategy 4x:
eq12.png
However, actual calculations tell me that's not gonna happen. Actual calculations tell me that it will take more time to reach 10,000$ again to the Strategy 4x, that is the red line in graph B above.
The way I calculated it is as follows:
Strategy 1x: 8800 * 1.04^x = 10000, where x is the months until reaching 10,000$ > x = 3,26 months
Strategy 4x: 5200 * 1.16^x = 10000, where x is the months until reaching 10,000$ > x = 4,41 months (more time!)
At this point I'm totally confused about what would really happen, A or B, and I hope someone can put some light on the matter.Last edited by cprcrack; 05032015, 11:14 PM.Tags: None
Leave a comment: