Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

humblepeasant

Swiss Franc

Recommended Posts

I was surprised to see that, unless I'm just missing it, no one is talking about the recent CHF move at TL?

 

I was lucky (just lucky, nothing else) enough to not be affected by it. I was completely out of the market at the time (and asleep), and I don't trade the CHF anyway. I do trade currencies, however...the EUR/USD, and occasionally the GBP and JPY.

 

Nevertheless, it has rattled me. I am conservative with leverage, but virtually any position at the time would have had a dramatic impact on an individual account. I've been trading for several years now, and always knew this type of thing technically can happen, but I know I personally basically tucked that type of risk away as theoretical, and have never really given it much thought.

 

Anyone caught in the move, good or bad? I've read that some of the more "bucket shop" style forex brokers are forgiving the debt, while real brokers aren't/can't.

 

Anyone know of any other similarly dramatic moves over the past few decades or so, in major markets such as the CHF?

 

Would like to just get a discussion going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HP,

 

Thanks a lot for bringing it up. :angry:;)

 

Don’t have time to ‘discuss’ much .... Fwiw, I took a 10% haircut - strike that - took a 10% beheading of NAV to a small, very inactive ( ie mostly abandoned since they stopped carrying PM’s several years ago ) OANDA account via a CHF/JPY position leveraged at 10:1.

In my 'head' it was a JPY play - one position in a cluster of JPY plays in that account - ... and that particular part of the play had been working.

That play on the JPY "symbol" in my head turned out to be, among other errors, a “Category Error”

For a good treatment of “Category Error”, etc. see

Epsilon Theory - Salient Partners | Ghost in the Machine, Part 1

...cute stuff like

…I get so annoyed when I read things like “this wasn’t just the greatest shock in the history of forex, it was the greatest shock in the history of traded securities! a 30 standard deviation event!” Please. Stop it. Just because you can impose a normal distribution on the EURCHF cross doesn’t mean that you should. …
in that article. So, even though in this case I could have lost that whole account without pain, it is proving to be a good 'learning moment' for me...

...

for some unknown reason the whole deal reminded me of Biondo and Pluchino

Phys. Rev. E 88, 062814 (2013) - Reducing financial avalanches by random investments

Improbable Research » Blog Archive

etc

 

also , re why SNB action has not been discussed on TL, for snicks see

On the Certainty of Uncertainty, or: Why there is no Skepticism beyond Self-Skepticism - disinformation

 

Hopefully someone will take up the conversation with you without just a bunch of

links-a-lot zdo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fwiw, ‘narrative based’ day trading short Euro larger size in regular account the following Mon morning more than recouped the CHFJPY nominal drawdown amount.

 

But, those funds will likely not be used to ‘refresh’ the OA account . That little account is pretty much on its own...

 

btw that group of JPY trades * is still on in the OA account, including the short CHFJPY stinger which is still on at an avgprice of ~ 122.70 . It has currently recovered from about half the max adversity it ticked to intraday near 139.+ on 1/15 and, long haul, may still work ( ... especially if I ‘revenge trade’ a bit and throw on some well-timed long USDCHF. The voice of trading teachers always tell you to never ‘revenge trade’. I break that rule routinely. The correct spirit for revenge trading is important though... rather than do it to teach the monster a lesson or show it a (power)thing or two etc., do it simply and dispassionately to take back what the monster took from you...

Inclusion of the term “well-timed” above is very important - especially when you’re dealing with a set of trades involving negative carry , etc...

The use of the term “monster” is significant too. :helloooo: :) )

 

* more fwiw - with cyclical short USDINR trades put on to offset interest costs / keep interest flow just barely net positive in the account...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if anyone here uses out-of-the-money options as a catastrophic insurance plan (basically as a WIDE stop-loss...wide so that the cost of the options is minimized...in the event of a major move with virtually no trades along the way).

 

I don't know much about options, and I've never traded them myself. It may in fact make more sense to simply buy calls and puts rather than hold outright positions and use options to control risk...I haven't run the numbers.

 

I would imagine it would be a little more tricky (and costly) to apply such a strategy to day trades. However, depending on the strategy, day trades potentially involve larger position sizes due to the more limited risk in terms of ticks...which means more exposure to catastrophe.

 

It may seem a little extreme/paranoid, but anything can happen. Germany could suddenly, unexpectedly leave the Eurozone. Russia could invade a member of NATO. A US president could be killed. Etc. Very, very unlikely...but certainly not impossible.

 

I have a certain level of risk tolerance (for my predetermined risk when I put on a trade...even with bad slippage). I have a hard time tolerating the risk of undoing years of work on a black-swan single day of trading.

 

Even options don't control for the risk of a brokerage going under. I guess the only solution there is to "diversify" your brokerage accounts. A major catastrophe could potentially cause multiple brokers to go under, however.

 

And before anyone chimes in on this...I am fully aware that the only way to eliminate risk in trading is not to trade. With no risk, no reward (most of the time). I merely seek to minimize risk.

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.