Get started

Euro / U.S. Dollar

No trades
See on Supercharts
Overview News
Ideas
Discussions Technicals Seasonals Economic Calendar

EURUSD trade ideas

The Ineffectiveness of Day Trading: A Critical Review of EmpiricThe Allure of Quick Profits Day trading has gained considerable popularity as an investment strategy among retail investors, particularly following technological advances in electronic trading platforms and commission-free brokerage services. This analysis examines the available empirical evidence from various markets and time periods to evaluate the economic viability of day trading as an investment strategy. The most comprehensive study on the subject comes from Barber et al. (2011), who analyzed the behavior of over 360,000 day traders in Taiwan. Their results show that over 80 percent of day traders lose money, and less than 1 percent can achieve consistently profitable results. These findings align with similar studies from other markets and confirm the systematic unprofitability of day trading for the vast majority of participants. Day trading represents a systematically unprofitable investment strategy for retail investors, rooted in cognitive biases (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979), excessive transaction costs, and market microstructure inefficiencies (O'Hara, 1995). Long-term passive investment strategies demonstrate superior risk-adjusted returns with significantly lower resource requirements. What the Research Shows The research landscape on day trading is clear and consistent across various markets. A systematic review of the most important studies follows established standards of financial market research. The inclusion criteria for relevant studies encompass empirical investigations with substantial sample sizes (more than 1,000 traders), minimum observation periods of 12 months, and quantitative performance measures. The available literature is based on millions of trading accounts from various developed markets. The historical development of day trading shows clear parallels to technological developments in the financial sector. Before deregulation through Electronic Communication Networks by the SEC in 1997, it was impossible for retail investors to trade directly in the market. With the rise of online brokers like E*TRADE and Ameritrade, day trading became accessible to the mass public for the first time. This technical opening coincided with aggressive marketing that promoted free trades, low fees, and success stories of individual traders. Empirical Findings Evidence from various markets shows consistent patterns. Barber et al. (2011) document that 84.3 percent of 360,000 analyzed day traders in Taiwan suffered losses, with a median return of minus 8.7 percent. Similar studies from the United States confirm loss rates exceeding 90 percent of participants. Jordan and Diltz (2003) conclude that even experienced day traders are hardly able to beat the market after costs in the long term. The long-term results are even more sobering: only a fraction of all day traders remain profitable over extended periods, while a significant portion abandons the activity within two years. The transaction cost analysis is based on realistic market conditions. A calculation example illustrates the structural challenges: with an assumed daily trading volume of $50,000 and eight round trips per day, substantial costs arise from commissions (approximately 0.1% per trade), bid-ask spreads (averaging 0.02-0.05%), and market impact (about 0.01% for smaller volumes). Annual Cost Calculation Example: - 252 trading days × 8 trades = 2,016 trades/year - Commission costs: 2,016 × $2.50 = $5,040 - Spread costs: $50,000 × 0.03% × 2,016 = $30,240 - Total costs: approximately $35,000 or 70% of daily trading volume This cost structure means that day traders must achieve gross returns of well over 70 percent annually just to break even, while passive investors bear annual costs of only 0.1 to 0.3 percent (Bogle, 2007). Behavioral Analysis and Cognitive Biases Behavioral research explains why day trading remains attractive despite poor success prospects. Odean (1999) shows that overconfident investors trade excessively and thereby reduce their expected returns. The disposition effect documented by Shefrin and Statman (1985) leads traders to realize gains too early and hold losses too long. Kahneman and Tversky's (1979) Prospect Theory explains systematic biases in decision-making under uncertainty. Loss aversion leads to losses weighing psychologically heavier than equivalent gains, resulting in irrational holding of losing positions. The gambler's fallacy manifests in the erroneous assumption of many day traders that past losses make future gains more likely. Recency bias leads to overweighting recent events. These psychological factors reinforce each other and create a vicious cycle of irrational decisions. Comparative Analysis: Day Trading versus Passive Strategies A comparison with established investment strategies illustrates the systematic disadvantages of day trading. Malkiel (2011) documents long-term returns of diversified portfolios at 6-8 percent real, while Barber and Odean (2000) show that frequent trading systematically reduces returns. Historical data shows that the S&P 500 Index achieved an average annual return of 10.2 percent with 15.8 percent volatility over 30 years (Sharpe ratio: 0.65). Day traders, in contrast, typically exhibit negative Sharpe ratios as losses dominate amid high volatility. The time investment differs dramatically: day trading requires 40-50 hours of weekly attention, while passive investing demands less than one hour per week. Studies also show health burdens from the constant stress of active trading. Market Microstructure and Professional Trading Market structure systematically favors institutional players. High-frequency trading firms possess latency advantages in the microsecond range, while retail traders operate with delays exceeding 100 milliseconds. They utilize co-location services and process data volumes inaccessible to private investors. Market-making operations profit from bid-ask spreads and exchange rebate programs. They operate under different regulatory frameworks and have access to dark pools and proprietary technology. Day trading mathematically represents a zero-sum game that becomes negative after costs. Since the sum of all trading gains and losses equals zero, but transaction costs are positive, the expected return for all participants collectively is necessarily negative. Alternative Investment Strategies Academic literature comprehensively documents the superiority of passive strategies. Bogle (2007) demonstrates through long-term data that low-cost index funds consistently achieve better net returns than active strategies. Passive Strategy Calculation Example: An investment of €10,000 in a low-cost ETF (0.15% TER) with 7% annual returns yields approximately €37,000 after 20 years. To achieve this result, day traders would need to consistently earn over 15% gross returns after costs—a scenario that is empirically nearly impossible. Factor-based investing offers additional improvements: Fama and French (1992) documented excess returns for value and size factors that are systematically and cost-effectively accessible. Limitations of the Evidence The research landscape has certain constraints. Survivorship bias in datasets may underestimate actual losses, as unsuccessful traders disappear from samples more quickly. Additionally, definitions of day trading vary between studies. External validity is influenced by changing market structures. Algorithmic trading and new financial instruments may alter established patterns. Nevertheless, the fundamental problems of high costs and systematic behavioral biases persist. Conclusion The empirical evidence is clear: day trading represents a loss-making activity for the vast majority of participants. The combination of high transaction costs, systematic behavioral biases, and structural market disparities makes consistent profitability nearly impossible. While isolated success stories exist, they represent statistical outliers rather than replicable strategies. The scientific evidence speaks unequivocally in favor of long-term, low-cost, and diversified investment strategies as superior alternatives to day trading. Those who nonetheless engage in day trading should be aware that they are not only competing against the market, but against mathematical and psychological realities that practically preclude a high probability of success. References Barber, Brad M., Yi-Tsung Lee, Yu-Jane Liu, and Terrance Odean. "Do Individual Day Traders Make Money? Evidence from Taiwan." *Review of Financial Studies* 24, no. 8 (2011): 2892-2922. Barber, Brad M., and Terrance Odean. "Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors." *Journal of Finance* 55, no. 2 (2000): 773-806. Bogle, John C. *The Little Book of Common Sense Investing*. Hoboken: Wiley, 2007. Fama, Eugene F., and Kenneth R. French. "The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns." *Journal of Finance* 47, no. 2 (1992): 427-465. Jordan, Douglas J., and J. David Diltz. "The Profitability of Day Traders." *Financial Analysts Journal* 59, no. 6 (2003): 85-94. Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk." *Econometrica* 47, no. 2 (1979): 263-291. Malkiel, Burton G. *A Random Walk Down Wall Street*. 10th ed. New York: Norton, 2011. Odean, Terrance. "Do Investors Trade Too Much?" *American Economic Review* 89, no. 5 (1999): 1279-1298. O'Hara, Maureen. *Market Microstructure Theory*. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1995. Shefrin, Hersh, and Meir Statman. "The Disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long: Theory and Evidence." *Journal of Finance* 40, no. 3 (1985): 777-790.
Education
by EdgeTools
EUR/USD Daily Chart Analysis For Week of July 18, 2025Technical Analysis and Outlook: In the current trading session, the Euro has continued its decline, completing our Mean Support level of 1.160. Recent analyses indicate that the Euro is likely to experience a sustained downward trend, with an anticipated retest at the Mean Support level of 1.159 and a possible further decline to reach a Currency Dip of 1.152. Nevertheless, it is crucial to consider the potential for a dead-cat bounce toward the Mean Resistance level of 1.167, which could trigger a significant reversal of the downtrend and target a Currency Dip of 1.152.
by TradeSelecter
EURUSD: Bears Are Winning! Short! My dear friends, Today we will analyse EURUSD together☺️ The market is at an inflection zone and price has now reached an area around 1.16557 where previous reversals or breakouts have occurred.And a price reaction that we are seeing on multiple timeframes here could signal the next move down so we can enter on confirmation, and target the next key level of 1.16419..Stop-loss is recommended beyond the inflection zone. ❤️Sending you lots of Love and Hugs❤️
Short
by FreeXauusdSignals
EURUSD / Euro – U.S. Dollar (4H) – ABC Bullish Structure EURUSD / Euro – U.S. Dollar (4H) – ABC Bullish Structure with Double Bottom Base Pattern Overview: Pattern Type: ABC Bullish + Corrective Double Bottom Asset: EURUSD Timeframe: 4H Trade Type: Bullish Bias – Monitoring for continuation after rejection from cluster support 🔎 Key Levels XA: 1.14663 → 1.18299 AB: 1.18299 → 1.16292 BC: 1.16292 → 1.17216 CD: Completion just under 1.15621 cluster Major Fib Cluster: 0.707% XA, 0.886 AB, 50% CD, Prior Horizontal Support Zone 📐 Fibonacci Extensions & Key Ratios 38.2% retracement: 1.16180 50.0% retracement: 1.15750 161.8% extension: 1.18150 💡 Price Action & Setup Price has completed an ABC corrective leg, forming a clean double bottom at the D point, hovering over the fib-rich support cluster. The rejection candle shows buyer interest, and the recent higher low structure implies potential for continuation, especially if price reclaims and holds above 1.1650 short-term structure. 🧠 Market Sentiment DXY easing slightly after strong dollar dominance EUR macro calendar quiet – technicals may dominate next moves Strong base = smart money accumulation likely underway 📊 Next Potential Movement Break above 1.1675 opens path toward 1.1720, then possibly 1.1815 If 1.1575 cluster fails → risk of full XA retracement 🛡 Risk Management Aggressive long entries already in play Conservative entries should wait for higher low confirmation above 1.1650 Protective stop: under 1.1550 zone 📌 Conclusion This is a bullish structure with a corrective double bottom base sitting right inside a dense confluence zone. Price is compressing between key fibs – expect a directional move next week. Keep your eye on the 1.1675 breakout or 1.1570 loss for next major decision. “In the densest zones of indecision, patterns and confluence provide the clearest map.”
Long
by TradeChartPatternsLikeThePros
EUR/USD Drops to $1.16 Amid Strong U.S. DataThe euro declined to $1.16 on Thursday, reaching its lowest level in almost a month as the U.S. dollar regained strength. The dollar’s rise followed solid U.S. inflation data and President Trump’s comments suggesting he will keep Fed Chair Jerome Powell in place, reducing expectations for near-term Fed rate cuts. Meanwhile, markets continued to monitor U.S.-EU trade negotiations ahead of the August 1 deadline. Resistance for the pair is at 1.1670, while support is at 1.1580.
by ChartMage
EURUSD(20250718) Today's AnalysisMarket news: ① Kugler: It is appropriate to keep the interest rate policy stable for "a while". ② Daly: Whether to cut interest rates in July or September is not the most critical. ③ Bostic: It may be difficult to cut interest rates in the short term. Technical analysis: Today's buying and selling boundaries: 1.1597 Support and resistance levels: 1.1683 1.1651 1.1630 1.1565 1.1544 1.1512 Trading strategy: If the price breaks through 1.1630, consider buying in, the first target price is 1.1651 If the price breaks through 1.1597, consider selling in, the first target price is 1.1565
by NicolaZhu
LONG for EURUSD?LONG EURUSD What is going on with EURUSD We see how beautiful the market went up from the beginning of the trend line constatly with pullbacks that means a steady uptrend not really the urge that the market want to go back. We used the fib as always to indicate 61.8% perfect pullback on that and as we see on the resistance that has to be tested. There will be a fake break out of 100-150 pips. If we go back on the RSI we see divergence momentum is back to average. We call this hidden divergence price goes up and indicator goes down. What indicates us that we also have new space for a higher high. Targets we have in mind 1.19035 with high momentum what I expect it will hit the 1.20274 , important to have in mind 1.20000 is a key level price wants to go there as a magnet. Reverse of the analyses: If it breaks the 61.8% it will retest the market structure and goes to the 1.13544 with high momentum just to test price and set us offside because that is what the market want hit as many stop losses because that’s where the liquidity is build up, takes out and will continue the uptrend. Follow my journey I try to post daily. Markets I analyse XAUUSD, EURUSD, USDMXN, XTIUSD, XRPUSD, BTCUSD. Will start more forex and Crypto soon.
Long
by JSth3Kid