3 ms·
Surely you can't? You don't have the latency advantages of big trading firms, nor the gazillion PhDs they employ. There's absolutely no way you are going to con
by IshKebab 1y ago
Surely you can't? You don't have the latency advantages of big trading firms, nor the gazillion PhDs they employ. There's absolutely no way you are going to consistently make money, let alone $200k/year. At best you'll get lucky and think it's skill.
- joshcsimmons 1y agoOf course you can. If you have $17M invested in $VOO you'll make about 200k every year in dividends. What's difficult is getting a higher rate of return. $200k is totally doable with $2M investment capital and a bit of disciplined options trading.
- palantird 1y agoFinally some advice for the common man.
- TuringNYC 1y ago>> $200k is totally doable with $2M investment capital and a bit of disciplined options trading. 10% probably. Though with the higher-than-market rate, there would also be dispersion in the consistency of the return. I could see some lean years where no money is made. I could also see a decade where you are buying at ever-higher valuations rather than dollar-cost averaging -- thus you could see a lean decade following. It all depends on how much consistency you want.
- IshKebab 1y agoObviously we're talking about returns above the market. You don't need an algorithmic trading platform to invest in index funds.
- auc 1y agoYou definitely can, I know single people or small teams running strategies with 2+ sharpe making millions a year.
- achierius 1y agoIt's possible: note that each one of those quants is going to be making $400k at minimum, plausibly significantly more. So any high-maintenance strategy (eg. in some niche market) that makes less than that is just not going to be worth the time it takes to find, implement, maintain, etc. Still not easy but it's not impossible.
- cosmicgadget 1y agoCan you talk about maximum upside without discussing capital?