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.

Rise-T

Position Sizing & Longs/Shorts

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

I used to consider myself something like a 'living position sizing encylopdia' ;) over the years, but enhancing my position sizing / real-time risk management spreadsheet to handle longs & shorts (used to be longs only), I've noticed that I am not 100% sure about the answer to the following rather simple question:

 

To make things easier, let's just talk about stocks, so there's a pretty high correlation between positions.

 

If I have a 100,000 USD portfolio and I have long positions worth 100,000 USD and short positions worth 100,000 USD.

 

Do I consider myself 0% invested then or 200%...?

 

I mean, 0% doesn't really make sense, but so doesn't 200%.

 

Any informed thoughts?

 

Thank you in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the long and short positions are both on the same instrument, you would be 2:1 invested in your example. You have $100k in cash, and you're using full (I think that's full in equities retail) buying power to short the extra $100k. You've used 2x the capital you actually own, so 2:1.

 

For reference, if you were long and short the SAME instrument the same amount, you would have a net neutral position. This is because as the value of one position goes down, the value of the other would go up the same amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I can tell you from direct experience in talking to many, many people over 15-16 years that the answer to your question depends on who you are talking to....unfortunately.

They measure it differently, they talk about it differently.....i dont think there is a universal language.eg; is 100% leverage = 1:1 or 2:1...

HOWEVER.....when talking to someone the best thing to do is differentiate between exposure and leverage, and talk about GROSS verses NET exposure and or leverage.

eg; long 100, short 100 gives gross exposure of 200, net exposure =0.

 

Or something along those lines.

We encountered this problem when talking to clients especially when it came time to talk about options and delta exposures, leverage and risk....(but thats a whole other story)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is the risk that you are trying to manage then by going long and short you have hedged away the exposure and the risk to the extent that they are correlated. So if the scrips have a correlation of 95% by hedging your next exposure has reduced to 5%. Hedging is a strategy of portfolio managers - not speculators.

 

But if you are a speculator and leveraging one position taking directional bets across different time frames then these positions are in reality not correlated. Your exposure and risk is twofold as you could profit / lose on both legs.

 

Jose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...To make things easier, let's just talk about stocks, so there's a pretty high correlation between positions....

 

If you are talking about stocks where there is a high correlation between positions then why are you both long and short at the same time?

 

Unless there is very little correlation between the positions then in all likelihood they will both be moved to a great extent by the same forces that are effecting the broad market.

 

If there isn't much correlation and one could expect different movements then you would be invested in the gross amount, or $200K in your example. If they are correlated then one would infer that your strategy of going long and short would only make sense under some sort of hedging strategy in which case your strategy would dictate the risk. Of course if you have the same luck I do (or did) there would likely be some sort of market movement that would whipsaw things quickly and stop both out in opposite directions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's most important is that your technically have 0% risk, not counting the cost of trading.

 

As for your 0% invested or 200%, neither is correct. There is never more than 100% of anything. !00% is all there can be. Look at it as if you were invested in stocks, long 5000 shares and short 5000 shares. You are 100% invested with 0% risk, but, in my case, I must pay 5 cents a share commission ($500) plus slippage just to go nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming you have long and short positions in different instruments - one way to think about it is - assume all your positions (both long and short) could go against you at the same time (unlikely but not beyond the realms of possibility - if someone had told you 3 years ago that Lehman and AIG would go bankrupt within weeks of each other ...... ) - how would you determine things then.

 

I am more comfortable with the portfolio heat type approach. You need to have a system with an initial stop loss to do this (although you can substitute your average historical loss or use atr to calculate volatility stop losses). The difference between your entry and the stop loss along with the size of your position allows you to estimate what percent of your equity you would loose if stopped out for each position you have. The total percent at risk among all instruments is the portfolio heat. 20% is a figure you see banded around as a max heat although depending on the performance of the system it may need to be a lot lower.

 

If you adopt this approach it does not matter whether a position is long or short - all you are concerned about is how much you could loose if it goes against you. Van Tharp is the best I have come across on the topic of position sizing (Trade your way to financial freedom book). I have no affiliation with his company - just a grateful reader.

 

Just to muddy the waters a bit further Curtis Faith in his book about the turtles says that one of the turtle "rules" addressed this - basically the rules meant that turtles were allowed to offset long and short positions against each other to a certain extent (and effectively have a higher portfolio heat than if all positions were in the same direction).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Sorry for replying sort of late, but I have been pretty busy the last couple of days.

 

And many thanks to all for taking the time to post!

 

1.) I guess the concept of Net & Gross exposure is what I was looking for. I now realize I was somehow trying to get those two stats into one figure - which I guess is next to impossible :crap: So realizing this was of great help for me. Also, I am a great fan of clear & systematic wording (not sure where I got that from...) - so this perfectly fits the bill. Thank you.

 

2.) Regarding being long & short in highly correlated instruments:

Firstly, my intention was to create my risk management spreadsheet as versatile as possible.

Secondly, when there are single stocks I've been watching breaking out in a constructive manner and (I want to own them in a continued market uptrend) while the general market seems stills suspect to me, what I sometimes do is initiating corresponding shorts with weak action at low risk points (i.e. rallies) to somewhat hedge the longs. When the general market finally decides its way, I slowly fade out of the shorts (or the longs) in order to get net long or short. Sure, sometimes I get faked out on both sides, but other times it works.

 

3.) Portfolio Heat etc.

I guess I've spend the better part of 5 years or so studying Van's material (after a huge gain followed by a big loss :roll eyes: - gold stocks in 2002... In fact, that is what got me into trading vs investing in the first place - controlling risk) and I am familiar with pretty much every concept he's written about. I was also reading avidly (and sometimes participating in) his old MasterMind forums (which sadly don't exist anymore, I suspect partly because of his recent strange affinity to Service Marks...:roll eyes: ).

On a sidenote, if you haven't read it yet, I would recommend his Definitive Guide to Position Sizing since it summarizes almost all position sizing concepts pretty well. It is a bit on the expensive side since he published it himself, but I definitely would have bought it (I don't have any affliliation with Van's company as well - besides being a client - but I kindly got the book for free, though, since I've been helping him in a - really very tiny - way with the book).

 

The measuring of exposure is just one out of many stats I've integrated into my risk management - I've tried to integrate as many as possible (at least the ones that make sense to me & you don't have to have a PHD in rocket science to calculate - as my math skills are rather questionable & I don't think it's really necessary - e. g. the material of Ralph Vince). Some stats that I use to measure risk: Open Initial Risk, Open Risk, Exposure (all of them for individual positions, for correlated groups and on a porfolio level (e. g. Open Position Risk, Open Group Risk, Open Porfolio Risk (= Portfolio Heat - see my preference for systematic wording above... :) ). All of them just for longs and just for shorts. All net & gross long/short. Adjusting position size for volatility. R-Multiples. Market's Money concept. Keeping positions & groups & the portfolio within defined max risk limits by peeling off units when necessary.

 

Regarding Curtis, I've followed his writings early on when he was still participating at his former forum at tradingblox.com. I bought his first book when it came out - and I agree, it is an excellent one. I try to incorporate that mentioned Turtle rule by measuring the risk of longs vs shorts.

 

Again, thank you all for your kind comments!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2p.

 

I think if the problem is framed as either 0% or 200% then it gets oversimplified. You trade your beliefs about position sizing and correlation. If you are very technical then you'd want to do some Monte-Carlo - a boot strap similar to van's approach (figure out your non-correlated R multiples and your correlated R multiples from backtest results), a permutation analysis (e.g. from Evidence Based Technical Analysis). You should also look at the sharpe ratio as well as Van's System Quality Number. The point is to be familiar to how much volatility is in your system and tuning the risk amount in relation to your capital to meet your objectives (e.g. 50% chance of making 50% per annum with a 10% chance of a 25% peak to trough drawdown).

 

Happy to provide further pointers.

 

DM

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

    • NFLX Netflix stock watch, local support and resistance areas at 838.12 and 880.5 at https://stockconsultant.com/?NFLX
    • NFLX Netflix stock watch, local support and resistance areas at 838.12 and 880.5 at https://stockconsultant.com/?NFLX
    • Hello citizens of the U.S. The hundred year trade war has leaked over into a trading war. Your equity holdings are under attack by huge sovereign funds shorting relentlessly... running basically the opposite of  PPT operations.  As an American you are blessed to be totally responsible for your own assets - the govt won’t and can’t take care of you, your lame ass whuss ‘retail’ fund managers go catatonic  and can't / won’t help you, etc etc.... If you’re going to hold your positions, it’s on you to hedge your holdings.   Don’t blame Trump, don’t blame the system, don’t even blame the ‘enemies’ - ie don’t blame period.  Just occupy the freedom and responsibility you have and act.  The only mistake ‘Trump’ made so far was not to warn you more explicitly and remind you of your options to hedge weeks ago.   FWIW when Trump got elected... I also failed to explicitly remind you... just sayin’
    • Date: 7th April 2025.   Asian Markets Plunge as US-China Trade War Escalates; Wall Street Futures Signal Further Turmoil.   Global financial markets extended last week’s massive sell-off as tensions between the US and its major trading partners deepened, rattling investors and prompting sharp declines across equities, commodities, and currencies. The fallout from President Trump’s sweeping new tariff measures continued to spread, raising fears of a full-blown trade war and economic recession.   Asian stock markets plunged on Monday, extending a global market rout fueled by rising tensions between the US and China. The latest wave of aggressive tariffs and retaliatory measures has unnerved investors worldwide, triggering sharp sell-offs across the Asia-Pacific region.   Asian equities led the global rout on Monday, with dramatic losses seen across the region. Japan’s Nikkei 225 index tumbled more than 8% shortly after the open, while the broader Topix fell over 6.5%, recovering only slightly from steeper losses. In mainland China, the Shanghai Composite sank 6.7%, and the blue-chip CSI300 dropped 7.5% as markets reopened following a public holiday. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index opened more than 9% lower, reflecting deep concerns about escalating trade tensions.           South Korea’s Kospi dropped 4.8%, triggering a circuit breaker designed to curb panic selling. Taiwan’s Taiex index collapsed by nearly 10%, with major tech exporters like TSMC and Foxconn hitting circuit breaker limits after each fell close to 10%. Meanwhile, Australia’s ASX 200 shed as much as 6.3%, and New Zealand’s NZX 50 lost over 3.5%.   Despite the escalation, Beijing has adopted a measured tone. Chinese officials urged investors not to panic and assured markets that the country has the tools to mitigate economic shocks. At the same time, they left the door open for renewed trade talks, though no specific timeline has been set.   US Stock Futures Plunge Ahead of Monday Open   US stock futures pointed to another brutal day on Wall Street. Futures tied to the S&P 500 dropped over 3%, Nasdaq futures sank 4%, and Dow Jones futures lost 2.5%—equivalent to nearly 1,000 points. The Nasdaq Composite officially entered a bear market on Friday, down more than 20% from its recent highs, while the S&P 500 is nearing bear territory. The Dow closed last week in correction. Oil prices followed suit, with WTI crude dropping over 4% to $59.49 per barrel—its lowest since April 2021.   Wall Street closed last week in disarray, erasing more than $5 trillion in value amid fears of an all-out trade war. The Nasdaq Composite officially entered a bear market on Friday, sinking more than 20% from its recent peak. The S&P 500 is approaching bear territory, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has slipped firmly into correction territory.   German Banks Hit Hard Amid Escalating Trade Tensions   German banking stocks were among the worst hit in Europe. Shares of Commerzbank and Deutsche Bank plunged between 9.5% and 10.3% during early Frankfurt trading, compounding Friday’s steep losses. Fears over a global trade war and looming recession are severely impacting the financial sector, particularly export-driven economies like Germany.   Eurozone Growth at Risk   Eurozone officials are bracing for economic fallout, with Greek central bank governor Yannis Stournaras warning that Trump’s tariff policy could reduce eurozone GDP by up to 1%. The EU is preparing retaliatory tariffs on $28 billion worth of American goods—ranging from steel and aluminium to consumer products like dental floss and luxury jewellery.   Starting Wednesday, the US is expected to impose 25% tariffs on key EU exports, with Brussels ready to respond with its own 20% levies on nearly all remaining American imports.   UK Faces £22 Billion Economic Blow   In the UK, fresh research from KPMG revealed that the British economy could shrink by £21.6 billion by 2027 due to US-imposed tariffs. The analysis points to a 0.8% dip in economic output over the next two years, undermining Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ growth agenda. The report also warned of additional fiscal pressure that may lead to future tax increases and public spending cuts.   Wall Street Braces for Recession   Goldman Sachs revised its US recession probability to 45% within the next year, citing tighter financial conditions and rising policy uncertainty. This marks a sharp jump from the 35% risk estimated just last month—and more than double January’s 20% projection. J.P. Morgan issued a bleaker outlook, now forecasting a 60% chance of recession both in the US and globally.   Global Leaders Respond as Trade Tensions Deepen   The dramatic market sell-off was triggered by China’s sweeping retaliation to a new round of US tariffs, which included a 34% levy on all American imports. Beijing’s state-run People’s Daily released a defiant statement, asserting that China has the tools and resilience to withstand economic pressure from Washington. ‘We’ve built up experience after years of trade conflict and are prepared with a full arsenal of countermeasures,’ it stated.   Around the world, policymakers are responding to the growing threat of a trade-led economic slowdown. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba announced plans to appeal directly to Washington and push for tariff relief, following the US administration’s decision to impose a blanket 24% tariff on Japanese imports. He aims to visit the US soon to present Japan’s case as a fair trade partner.   In Taiwan, President Lai Ching-te said his administration would work closely with Washington to remove trade barriers and increase purchases of American goods in an effort to reduce the bilateral trade deficit. The island's defence ministry has also submitted a new list of US military procurements to highlight its strategic partnership.   Economists and strategists are warning of deeper economic consequences. Ronald Temple, chief market strategist at Lazard, said the scale and speed of these tariffs could result in far more severe damage than previously anticipated. ‘This isn’t just a bilateral conflict anymore — more countries are likely to respond in the coming weeks,’ he noted.   Analysts at Barclays cautioned that smaller Asian economies, such as Singapore and South Korea, may face challenges in negotiating with Washington and are already adjusting their economic growth forecasts downward in response to the unfolding trade crisis.           Oil Prices Sink on Demand Concerns   Crude oil continued its sharp slide on Monday, driven by recession fears and weakened global demand. Brent fell 3.9% to $63.04 a barrel, while WTI plunged over 4% to $59.49—both benchmarks marking weekly losses exceeding 10%. Analysts say inflationary pressures and slowing economic activity may drag demand down, even though energy imports were excluded from the latest round of tariffs.   Vandana Hari of Vanda Insights noted, ‘The market is struggling to find a bottom. Until there’s a clear signal from Trump that calms recession fears, crude prices will remain under pressure.’   OPEC+ Adds Further Pressure with Output Hike   Bearish sentiment intensified after OPEC+ announced it would boost production by 411,000 barrels per day in May, far surpassing the expected 135,000 bpd. The alliance called on overproducing nations to submit compensation plans by April 15. Analysts fear this surprise move could undo years of supply discipline and weigh further on already fragile oil markets.   Global political risks also flared over the weekend. Iran rejected US proposals for direct nuclear negotiations and warned of potential military action. Meanwhile, Russia claimed fresh territorial gains in Ukraine’s Sumy region and ramped up attacks on surrounding areas—further darkening the outlook for markets.   Always trade with strict risk management. Your capital is the single most important aspect of your trading business.   Please note that times displayed based on local time zone and are from time of writing this report.   Click HERE to access the full HFM Economic calendar.   Want to learn to trade and analyse the markets? Join our webinars and get analysis and trading ideas combined with better understanding of how markets work. Click HERE to register for FREE!   Click HERE to READ more Market news.   Andria Pichidi HFMarkets   Disclaimer: This material is provided as a general marketing communication for information purposes only and does not constitute an independent investment research. Nothing in this communication contains, or should be considered as containing, an investment advice or an investment recommendation or a solicitation for the purpose of buying or selling of any financial instrument. All information provided is gathered from reputable sources and any information containing an indication of past performance is not a guarantee or reliable indicator of future performance. Users acknowledge that any investment in Leveraged Products is characterized by a certain degree of uncertainty and that any investment of this nature involves a high level of risk for which the users are solely responsible and liable. We assume no liability for any loss arising from any investment made based on the information provided in this communication. This communication must not be reproduced or further distributed without our prior written permission.
    • AMZN Amazon stock watch, good buying (+313%) toi hold onto the 173.32 support area at https://stockconsultant.com/?AMZN
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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