Which has better odds of making a profit? Risking 1 to make 2 or risking 2 to make 1?
1:2 has 33% odds to win, 2:1 has 77% odds to win. Most people would then say "well the end profit is the same, it evens out" but that's not true as win rate is for each individual trade. It's not cumulative like everyone thinks. Ex: If you take 2 trades with 33%, odds are you lose both. If you take 2 trades with 77%, odds are you win both.
Business & Corporate Developments: * McDonald's ($MCD): McRib returns to the menu. * Jersey Mike's: Acquired for $8 billion. * $AAL: Introducing a "Gate Lice" alarm to improve boarding efficiency. * $NVEE: Awarded $14 million in Southern California infrastructure contracts. * $JAZZ: Receives FDA approval for cancer therapy Ziihera.
![Hey. Beginner question. [AI Trading]](https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1527430253228-e93688616381?crop=entropy&cs=tinysrgb&fit=max&fm=jpg&ixid=M3wxMTc3M3wwfDF8c2VhcmNofDF8fHJvYm90fGVufDB8fHx8MTczMjI4MTMxNXww&ixlib=rb-4.0.3&q=80&w=600)
So if trading is basically a technical analysis of the chart. Why do we have to learn it, can't the Ai do all the stuff for us and we just pour in money? The fundamental problem is the “AI” you’re thinking of isn’t AI. It’s
Corporate Moves & Product Launches: * Jaguar's new ad sparks social media buzz. * Netflix ($NFLX): Paul-Tyson match breaks records with $18M in-person ticket sales. * Novo Nordisk ($NVO): Wegovy launched in China at a significantly lower price than in the US. * Disney ($DIS): Debuts new cruise ship Treasure; plans to
IMO it’s really the beginners hosing themselves. There’s little reason to do what they want because it's unrealistic. Why would I offer one on one mentorship when 99% of the people are looking to be a millionaire in a week from a $100 investment; all while