Portfolio Boss

Case study in 100% winning months

Corona Del Mar, CA


Howdy Friend,


Imagine this: you're living in the early 19th century, a time before smartphones, social media, or even televisions, and there's this crazy new idea taking the world by storm.


It's called phrenology. Sounds kind of exotic, doesn't it? You walk into a parlor, much like getting your fortune read today. But instead of tarot cards or a crystal ball, the chap there sizes up your skull. The shape, the bumps, the size. They're all supposed to unlock the mysteries of your personality. Is it a bit bizarre? You bet. But guess what?


People LOVED it.


We're talking about a time from 1810 to the late 1840s when phrenology was as mainstream as watching a football game on a Sunday afternoon today. It was a fad, a craze, a whirlwind phenomenon, captivating folks from Britain to the United States. But here's where it gets really interesting. This wasn't just a fun party trick.


This was shaping our society. It was used to justify everything from racial hierarchies to the reasons behind criminal behavior. Just think about the implications... Phrenology was hot, controversial, and inescapable.


But all bad things must come to an end, right? By the time the late 19th century rolled around, new stars were on the horizon. The dawn of psychology and neuroscience began to expose the cracks in phrenology's foundation.


Gradually, phrenology's influence faded away, replaced by these newer, more reliable sciences (although I could make a case that psychology is still full of BS after all the data fakery going on). But here's the kicker. Even though phrenology's been debunked, people haven't changed a bit. We're still living smack dab in the middle of Pseudoscienceville.


All you have to do is go on Twitter and you'll see garbage analysis dressed up just enough to fool the masses into believing it's meaningful...just like Phrenology. The final straw for me was when these folks started sharing cardboard box prices without any analysis whatsoever. And don't get me started on the "sell in May and go away" crowd that has missed this massive rally in stocks.


Thankfully, the vast majority of our members are on a completely different path that must seem surreal compared to how they used to trade. 100% Club member, Jay Adams, has been living the dream: Since switching over to Meta ML strategies, he has been winning every month.


Here's what he posted:


"I haven't had any losing months yet (not even close yet, knock on wood ) since I started using them, my numbers are better than [Josh 100 Index] and I do not have any crazy swings on a daily basis. My average draw down on my 10 best 100% profit months metas are 1.2 lowest to 2.1% highest and I don't do any reduction in the triple leveraged ETF's. I have found that the proportion of the amount of money going into trades did finally even out once the number of systems increased into the metas but I'm still only picking 11-23 systems per day."

Great to see that Jay is living up to the goal of 100% winning months. Perhaps if you ask nicely, he'll tell you about his process for creating these kick-gluteus Meta ML's. The catch: You have to be a 100% Club member to access the forum.


Here's how:


Click here >>


P.S. This is the last week you'll ever see this page. It's making its final curtain call. 


So you have two choices: 1) Keep doing what you're doing. I hope it works out for you. 2) Take the shortcut like Jay did and join 100% Club along with all the perks.


Either way, it's time to make a decision.


Click here now >>

Trade smart,

Dan "Prince of Proof" Murphy


Disclaimer: The results listed herein are based on hypothetical trades. Plainly speaking, these trades were not actually executed. Hypothetical or simulated performance results have certain inherent limitations. Unlike an actual performance record, simulated results do not represent actual trading. Also, since the trades have not actually been executed, the results may have under (or over) compensated for the impact, if any, of certain market factors such as lack of liquidity. You may have done better or worse than the results portrayed.

Insert Image

Related Articles