tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,447
- Reactions
- 6,477
Its a while since I was a serious trader - but I do remember that a big driver to profitability was when I started exiting positions when I thought I wasn't right. Its a subtle difference to when 'you have it wrong' the main difference at least with stocks, is that a not right exit will generally be less congested than a 'wrong' exit spot so you get less slippage and more opportunity because not right generally tends to be a shorter hold period then waiting for confirmation of wrong.
On one hand your break even loses could be considered an arbitrary exit that are an expense as per RY theory, but I suspect that at least on the DAX with your time frame they are acting as a crude 'I'm not right' (on the initial momentum) exit. In which case they fall into the directionally informed category.
So I have been pondering this thread today.
Here is what I have come up with, I think I have something fundamentally wrong
If a Stop never improves a system, does this infer that the best system is to simply buy and hold indefinitely? Therefore a system can never beat the market? Are all the system traders wasting their time?
If when you close a trade never improves a system, is this the same for the entry? No entry method will improve the system so you may as well just buy when ever you have excess funds?
What about a system that only takes shorts? The markets over a long enough period will rise (hopefully), meaning the longer you hold a short the more money you will loose, therefore a shorter time frame stop should be more profitable?The converse of my first point.
Then I went round and round in circles trying to figure this out......
It's all break-even stops and arbitrary percentage or money-related trailing stops that hurt a system.
For a stop to add value it needs to have predictive quality. Same for entries. They need to be better than random to add value.
Not sure about shorts. But what you're saying makes sense.
You're right, tech, it is a sweeping statement - I should have seen that.
How about this:
Break-even stops and arbitrary percentage- or money-related trailing stops hurt a system.
For a stop to add value it needs to have predictive quality.
Entries need to be better than random to add value.
I'm pretty sure you still wouldn't agree with any part of it.
Rather than explaining my points above, I would suggest the following:
You are obviously a very talented, successful, intuitive trader. Your entries will have been well thought out and are far from random. Therefore, a break-even stop should add value IN YOUR CASE.
Most traders are not that good, though (sorry, that's another sweeping statement), and for them a break-even stop is more like insurance. They didn't lose any money, but the trend probably continued without them after their break-even stop took them out of the trade.
Similarly, your experience will tell you when a trend has run its course and to get out right away. That's kind of predictive. Others will wait for some "magic" percentage figure or a fixed dollar amount to exit. That is not adding value.
I can't prove any of this, of course.
On a lighter note regarding your often-made comment:
"--- but a short only method isn't simply a reversal of a losing long method"
How about a really bad, consistently losing long method?
Wouldn't those signals be good for shorting?
Could hedging be your friend? Price can either go up or down. Say your target is a long trade but price goes against you - after x amount of points against you (instead of a SL) could you not open an opposite trade in this case a short position?
Best case scenario you're going to breakeven/recover as soon as price starts going in the direction of your initial position (long) and you exit the short position.
I am no Professional and I would never attempt this in a Live account but would be interested to hear your thoughts.
Could hedging be your friend? Price can either go up or down. Say your target is a long trade but price goes against you - after x amount of points against you (instead of a SL) could you not open an opposite trade in this case a short position with another target?
Best case scenario you're going to breakeven/recover as soon as price starts going in the direction of your initial position (long) and you exit the short position.
I am no Professional and I would never attempt this in a Live account but would be interested to hear your thoughts.
After years of trading OTC derivative products I'd certainly caution against the placement of stops on any OTC products. I've seen no end of highly suspicious price behaviour whenever the market is within proximity to conditional orders. At times I've also had wide stops (sometimes more than 2% away from market) that were spiked with a spooky degree of precision.I've just been reading about "Stop Loss Hunting". Apparently some brokers and Institutional Traders have access to information on where Stops are placed. Apparently sometimes they make trades to trigger these stop losses if there are enough stop losses placed at a given point.
Now I'm spooked about placing stop losses. Are my concerns real, or is this something that vary rarely happens?
Also, I'm trading FOREX (demo account only at this point), and am thinking that the market is too large for most brokers and/or Institutional Traders to affect the price in such a way to go "stop loss hunting"?
... Now I'm spooked about placing stop losses. Are my concerns real, ...
I have had an angry exchange of email with my broker over a very badly handled trade.Damn, I was hoping you guys would tell me the opposite. So what is the answer? Don't place stops? Try and place stops where you think others won't place stops, therefore you won't be part of the group that gets wiped out? Or don't trade at all? Some other answer?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?