Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

hanz

Trading Capital...

Recommended Posts

Guest forsearch

Trading what? Knowing what you are trading is as important as how to trade it. A little more info on what you are planning to trade would be helpful to answer your question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hanz-

If you are highly skilled with your Risk Reward Ratio/money management/discipline you would be able to start with less. If you are not, I would start with more capital.

 

Example you say: Sure- If you enter a trade, set your S/L upon entering at a determined percentage of your account size or dollar amount, and then you have the ability not to move it or tweak it- then you can start with less- if not, I'd start with more.

Aaron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What if you wanted to trade individual stocks. Would 40k in a margin account be a decent start?

 

To be brutally honest, if you are asking questions like this, this means you have no system, no plan and no backtesting and you should not even think about trading until you do. If you do, you would have a pretty good idea what account size you need for your type of trading and goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest forsearch
What if you wanted to trade individual stocks. Would 40k in a margin account be a decent start?
PDT rule says $25K is the account mininum for daytrading equities.

 

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I should have stated the question more clearly. I know that day trading min is at 25k if you make 4 round trips a week. The question I should have asked is 15k a reasonable cushion above the 25k min. I actually do not plan to do this for about a year while soaking up knowledge and practicing strategies and such and then will I decide whether or not to make the jump but want to know how much I should expect to save. Are equities not the best thing to start with? Any feedback is appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest forsearch

You should only plan to trade $$$ that you can afford to lose.

 

Especially the first time around. Prepare to blow out an account or two of real money until you get the hang of it.

 

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

trade futures the margin is less and the account size does not need to be so high and the gains are significantly higher , I like the SP , wheat, corn , t-notes all can be traded with an account around 5k if you wanted too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WIth futures on things with wheat and things like that though isnt it a lot harder to apply fundamentals which come from news and other sources as it isnt as publicized as companies are? basically the reward is higher but isnt also a lot harder compared to stocks where more information is available?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trade futures the margin is less and the account size does not need to be so high and the gains are significantly higher , I like the SP , wheat, corn , t-notes all can be traded with an account around 5k if you wanted too.

 

You failed to mention something about trading futures, esp on a small account - you can blast through that account in a day if you are not sure what you are doing.

 

Futures are attractive b/c you can jump in w/ very little on deposit but it will evaporate rather quickly if you are not careful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trade futures the margin is less and the account size does not need to be so high and the gains are significantly higher , I like the SP , wheat, corn , t-notes all can be traded with an account around 5k if you wanted too.
The gains are higher but so are the losses. And in the beginning one can expect rather losses than gains. Playing 1 contract in futures can still mean quite big money for a beginner. With equities you can size your positions much better. But I think 40k is enough for daytrading future contracts. If you can manage your losses under 200 per trade, it represents 0.5% of capital. 0.5 - 1% is reasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With futures there is much more volatility, correct? My idea was to trade equities because it is a market I already have a basic understanding of and if you are buying 500 shares of a $30 stock it isnt often it is going to go more than a point or two in one direction or the other.

 

I am not trying to get rich quick so my idea was if you can be successful with stocks say in 500 share lots and maybe make a point a day then that would be $500 gross (before taxes and broker fee). I understand there is still considerable risk and a lot more capital is required but my feeling is it is less volatile at the same time so it would be possible to have your account in better control for a beginner.

 

Any thoughts or feedback on this would be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont recommend you trying to make hundreds per trade but tens. Take 50 shares instead of 500 for a beginning. There is no need to rush. Once you start to be profitable with small money, then you can rise your bets. Diversify your capital, take more smaller positions rather than one big one. There might be a sudden 30% move (even gap jumping over your stop), and if you had all your capital in one trade you could lose a lot.

 

Problem is futures is not the volatility. Some stocks are more volatile than most futures. The problem (or advantage if you are experienced enough) is the leverage which allows you to take much bigger positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is if you are trading such small lots I fear the broker fee is going to eat almost all of your gain. Also I understand there is always risk of something like this happening but how often does a stock suddenly drop 30%. This rarely happens in a single day nevermind within 15 minutes.

 

I would consider possibly starting with 100 share lots. It seems like not many people on this site actually trade equities, is there a reason other than the higher leverage available in trading commodoties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is if you are trading such small lots I fear the broker fee is going to eat almost all of your gain. Also I understand there is always risk of something like this happening but how often does a stock suddenly drop 30%. This rarely happens in a single day nevermind within 15 minutes.

 

I would consider possibly starting with 100 share lots. It seems like not many people on this site actually trade equities, is there a reason other than the higher leverage available in trading commodoties?

 

Futures are more simple when it comes to tax time, you don't need as much capital and the pattern day trader rule doesn't apply. Those are probably the main reasons. I also find it much easier to monitor one or two markets and study those charts rather than keep up with a dozen or more stocks all at once. The bid/ask spreads in futures are small too which is nice when it comes to managing a trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is if you are trading such small lots I fear the broker fee is going to eat almost all of your gain. Also I understand there is always risk of something like this happening but how often does a stock suddenly drop 30%. This rarely happens in a single day nevermind within 15 minutes.
My apologies, I forgot you wrote about DAY trading stocks. Daytrading 50 shares lot indeed doesnt make much sense. And the over-night gaps are would be avoided by daytrading, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... is there a reason other than the higher leverage available in trading commodoties?

 

* 60/40 tax treatment in US

* easier to focus on a couple markets, or just one

* leverage

 

Those are the 3 main things for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
day trades are taxed at 40%, are you sure on this? i thought it was closer to 25

 

I think I know how futures are taxed. :roll eyes:

 

http://www.traderslog.com/futures-trading-taxes.htm

Commodities futures capital gains/losses are reported on Form 6781 (Section 1256 Contracts), which qualifies these for an advantageous tax split: 60% at the long-term rate of 15% and 40% at the ordinary short-term rate of up to 35%, or a combined rate of 23%, for a tax savings of 12%.

 

Because of this attractive 60/40 split, most commodities traders forego mark-to-market accounting and its favorable “loss insurance” in order to reap the benefits of the lower capital gains rate.

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/1256.html

 

(3) any gain or loss with respect to a section 1256 contract shall be treated as—

(A) short-term capital gain or loss, to the extent of 40 percent of such gain or loss, and

(B) long-term capital gain or loss, to the extent of 60 percent of such gain or loss, and

 

Straight from the IRS form (which is also attached to this post):

attachment.php?attachmentid=7542&stc=1&d=1218817633

tl3.png.92408c247a2d4f486110280aa76b5f91.png

f6781.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for being slow and confused but simply you are saying what.

 

If you day trade equities, you are taxed at 40%?

 

 

Then what is the tax rate for futures contracts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.