Heh. The question was about jobs, not trading strategies.

You could try compliance if it interests you. To me, that’s not very interesting, but to each her own. It also depends on what you see yourself doing in maybe 10 years. If you still think you would be interested in compliance, go for it. I don’t know if there’s that much upward mobility, though, if you want to move up the chain in a few years.

Investment banking is mainly acting as a saleperson if you’re part of the actual banking division. They try to get clients to use that bank to finance deals. So, if you’re great at sales, then i-banking might be a good field.

I know the actual government doesn’t have great job prospects, but maybe you could find your niche at some other corporation that is to your liking but you can still apply some of your government knowledge. It’s kind of tough to recommend anything without knowing more.

A good entry is one that initiates a trade at a point of low potential risk and high potential reward. A point of low risk is usually a point from which there is little adverse excursion before the market begins to move in the trade’s favor. Entries that yield small adverse excursions on successful trades are desirable because they permit fairly tight stops to be set, thereby minimizing risk. A good entry should also have a high probability of being followed quickly by favorable movement in the market. Trades that languish before finally taking off tie up money that might be better used elsewhere; not only do such trades increase market exposure, but they waste margin and lead to “margin-ineffCent” trading or portfolios. Perfect entries would involve buying the exact lows of bottoming points and selling the exact highs of topping points. Such entries hardly ever occur in the real world and are not necessary for successful trading. For trading success it is merely necessary that entries, when coupled with reasonable exits, produce trading systems that have good overall performance characteristics.