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.

Colenelsteve

How Many Stocks Should I Be Looking at

Recommended Posts

Hey, guys,

 

This has probably been covered a million times on here already, but my question is... If I want to get serious about day trading, how many stocks should I be keeping an eye on.

 

I am talking ball park. I just don't want to try and keep track of too many at first and get overwhelmed or confused. I don't want to limit myself either. Is keeping an eye on 20 or so but getting intimate with 5-ish reasonable?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Steve.

 

I am a very succeesful day trader and I only trade around 2 stocks at a time Pretty much the same one, day after day. You really don't need to have a lot of stocks to day trade. If you have 2 like I do and they move, it's more than enough.

 

Good luck Steve!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steve,

 

what you said is 100% correct. Trading on high liquid two stocks, same, day after day, is to trade & follow them.

Is it possible for you to give strategy you are using ? I am not much successful on my strategy rather you can say i do not have any proven strategy with me.

 

Thanks

viswanath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me quite a while to figure out my strategy. First things first. I use eSignal for my charting software. Over there I have a few custom indicators that really work wonders. You can get some of them on Emini Day Trading (MACDiv is great for its devergence). It's a bit difficult explaining exactly how I trade in words. BTW, on the indicators I use "ALOT" is the basic MACD, but you have to change the original settings from 12,26,9 to 5,35,5.

 

Sorry i couldn't help you more.

 

Good luck,

 

E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think if you have -

- enough money

- a trading strategy that has an edge

- the discipline to actually focus and work every day

 

Then the more stocks the better.

 

This creates two real issues - portfolio issues with regards to the platform to use and monitor the portfolio, and the portfolio risk management - an extra level over just single instrument trading.

 

At present most platforms are too orientated to cover only a few instruments and require way too much management for portfolios and active trading. There are some exceptions - but they are limited depending on the instruments and the country you are in.

Ideally Excel allows the greatest flexibility but then you have to have the charting and the broker all talk via Excel.....as opposed to having just one system.

Plus with more instruments you often need greater computing power.

my two cents...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really have to disagree with SIUYA! Not bashing or attacking you in any way whatsoever but, give me just ONE reason why "the more stocks the better"??

 

Why??

 

Think about it my friend. If you trade every day the same 2 or 3 stocks, and they are highly liquid and most importantly, "They Move" than what else do you need?

 

I know of a few day traders that monitor over 100 stocks. You know what I have to say to that?

 

NUTSSSSSS! Instead of trading, they look at the stocks and waste valuable time. I only trade for ONE hour a day, and I'm usually done before 11 am.

 

Take it from someone that REALLY learned his lesson. I do EXTREMELY well with an over 95% winning trades, I barely have losers and many many times I have made over 50 trades in a row without one loser.

 

But again hey, to each his own.

 

To finish this off, you really do NOT need to watch alot of stocks. 2 or 3 are more than enough.

 

Cheers,

 

E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  emazing said:
I really have to disagree with SIUYA! Not bashing or attacking you in any way whatsoever but, give me just ONE reason why "the more stocks the better"??

 

Why??

 

Think about it my friend. If you trade every day the same 2 or 3 stocks, and they are highly liquid and most importantly, "They Move" than what else do you need?

 

I know of a few day traders that monitor over 100 stocks. You know what I have to say to that?

 

NUTSSSSSS! Instead of trading, they look at the stocks and waste valuable time. I only trade for ONE hour a day, and I'm usually done before 11 am.

 

Take it from someone that REALLY learned his lesson. I do EXTREMELY well with an over 95% winning trades, I barely have losers and many many times I have made over 50 trades in a row without one loser.

 

But again hey, to each his own.

 

To finish this off, you really do NOT need to watch alot of stocks. 2 or 3 are more than enough.

 

Cheers,

 

E.

 

Oh yeah? I made 50 bazillion million stock trades in a row without a loser.

 

Your claim is EXTREMELY transparent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MightyMouse, I don't have to prove you or anyone else anything at all. I'm not trying to show off in any way or form whatsoever. All I'm trying to do is tell some people that you do NOT have to be looking at alot of stocks.

 

BTW, working at a hedge fund and being a quant trader (if you even know what that is) is not for the faint of heart.

 

Why don't you go and apply at a hedge fund and see what the hiring process is all about.You really do have to know your shit.

 

But whatever, do believe what you want to and trade the way you want to. Who am I to do ANY claims?

 

In my trading career I learned that there are 2 types of traders, (1) the one who is actually open to learn and (2) the other who's bashing and talking all kinds of negative nonsense.

 

Which one are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  emazing said:

 

Take it from someone that REALLY learned his lesson. I do EXTREMELY well with an over 95% winning trades, I barely have losers and many many times I have made over 50 trades in a row without one loser.

 

 

E.

 

The one reason to trade more than a few stocks..........trade more instruments and make more money. Its that easy!

 

the point is its not that easy, but if you have a repeatable dynamic robust edge then surely you should be able to apply that to a lot of instruments. The hard part is being able to find the time and systems to be able to do it effectively. But clearly with your track record as it is then that should be no problem.

 

There are plenty of stocks that fit your criteria of being liquid and that move.

Now if there are other motivations like, diversification, wanting to only work 1 hour a day, not wanting to follow a portfolio and understand portfolio management, desire to specialise, desire to just trade one instrument then fine...... but

 

(As you mention in another post...... you dont need to trade a lot of stocks....but dont say people who do are nuts. ...you also question MM about the bashing and then you say others are nuts.....this is a forum for discussion, varying ideas, and opinions.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  emazing said:
MightyMouse, I don't have to prove you or anyone else anything at all. I'm not trying to show off in any way or form whatsoever. All I'm trying to do is tell some people that you do NOT have to be looking at alot of stocks.

 

BTW, working at a hedge fund and being a quant trader (if you even know what that is) is not for the faint of heart.

 

Why don't you go and apply at a hedge fund and see what the hiring process is all about.You really do have to know your shit.

 

But whatever, do believe what you want to and trade the way you want to. Who am I to do ANY claims?

 

In my trading career I learned that there are 2 types of traders, (1) the one who is actually open to learn and (2) the other who's bashing and talking all kinds of negative nonsense.

 

Which one are you?

 

Of course your not trying to pretend that you are the very best trader. Of course you have nothing to prove. If you were doing that you would say that you do significantly better than 95% winning trades. Your string of winners would far exceed 50 in a row and you certainly wouldn't say that it takes you so much time during the day to do it. I apologize for being harsh since i mistook your trading statistics as exaggerated claims.

 

I am the type of trader who trades and puts real money on the line each and every trade I take. I trade independently and would not want to ever trade for a firm. The last person I worked for was my father when I was 16-17 years old. Its great, however, that you work for a hedge fund that allows you to trade for one hour. That allows you plenty other hours of the day too heal the infirm with the touch of your hand. Hell, you may be able to heal them simply by looking at them. Praise the Heavens for He walks among us.

 

I am not bashing but it is my opinion that you are a little boy who likes to make people believe in fairy tails about trading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MightyMouse, do know this: I blew out several accounts while learning the long and brutal journey of day trading. It used to be the other way around, each trade I would enter would go against me.

 

Luckily I 'am one of the 5% who made it.

 

In regards to your posts to me, I'm not sure I understand the reason for all these negative vibes you're sending me (I'm a little boy??).

 

I personally taught 4 people my trading strategy, 3 of my family and one good friend of mine. The all work at prop firms and are doing phenominally well. I really don't know why you are so negative towards me and possibly a bit bitter?

 

I hope I'll never grow as old and sour as you are. May god bless you. I wish you nothing more than to succeeed in this brutal game of trading.

 

E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  emazing said:
SIUYA, you 're wrong. I said people who "MONITOR" over 100 stocks are nuts! Instead of trading, you're wasting time looking, but that's just my personal opinion.

 

E.

 

Point taken..... but the same could be said about people who monitor one or two stocks and dont trade them.

 

While a lot of context can be lost in written forums, it is clear that your posts have been misunderstood, and as a hint....capital letters, exclamation marks, name calling, blunt statements and self promotion (not that I am saying you are guilty of this) generally draw the reader away from the point you are trying to make. :)

 

I am sure MM may agree to disagree with me as he knows what my motto (acronym) stands for. :)

 

regardless, all the best working for your hedge fund.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SIUYA, I must apologize if I offended anyone here. I'm truly sorry. When I joined TL not too long ago, my intentions were only but good and that includes disagreeing with some people. But I strongly believe that if the disagreeing is done in a tactful manner, than it's fine.

 

Unfortunately, not everyone agrees with me on this one.

 

Anyway, all the best to you:-))))))))))

 

Cheers,

 

Emazing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  emazing said:
SIUYA, you 're wrong. I said people who "MONITOR" over 100 stocks are nuts! Instead of trading, you're wasting time looking, but that's just my personal opinion.

 

Actually you are both correct.

 

There is NOTHING wrong with filtering through, or scanning 100 stocks, or even 500, if your scan throws up a heavily filtered opportunity that is ready NOW. A chart is a chart, and if the signal says "go" then you take it.

 

How you do that will depend on YOU, as well as on the software you use, the information at your disposal (sector, index, instrument, order book) and so on.

 

Yet the person who, like Emazing, specializes in just 2 or three stocks is equally performing his art, as the results are dependent, amongst other things, on his knowledge of the "personality" or characteristics of those couple of stocks he trades.

 

This is just a storm in a teacup. It is understandable that when one knows his method as well as the traders involved in this exchange of opinion do, then strong opinions are bound to emerge.

 

As all are truthfully speaking of their own solid experiences with the market, it is proof to me that each side of this debate is operating a very robust system/approach to trading.

 

I have enjoyed the thoughts evoked by all proponents in this discussion - thanks to you all. It is easy for me to see that we are actually all on the same page, but understandable that those on the right will have a totally different approach from those on the left!

 

It is the results that count, and I look forward to continuing discussion.

 

Perhaps we could look at why each of you believes so strongly in his approach, instead of dismissing the likely success all of you are achieving.

 

What has led you to conclude that maximum 3 stocks are best to focus on, Emazing, as opposed to the many that Siuya farms in his approach?

 

I think your responses would be very constructive to the discussion, from here on. Care to elaborate? I would enjoy your reasons for your views.

 

EDIT: Siuya - the acronym for your username is a little rude - I doubt you would get the full version registered!

Edited by Ingot54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ingot54, I have no problem sharing with you and the rest why I believe you should not be day trading many stocks, "BUT", I do ask all members, please no bashing or bad-mouthing. It is my own personal opinion and I myself have no problem at all if people disagree as long as it's done in a tactful manner.

 

My trading style is as follows: I guess you can call me more of a scalper. I aim for small profits like $0.10 to $0.20, but sometimes I may go for a bit more. I try to go in and out of a trade >>>as fast as I possibly can<<<<, many times just mere seconds, a few minutes the most. As I mentioned before, I mostly trade more expensive stocks such as BIDU and AAPL but on the rare occasion I will trade a penny stock as well (usually pump and dumps that are up 300% to 500% in just a few days. These can be great shorts).

 

The downside of trading these types of stocks is that they are VERY expensive so you really need some buying power behind you.

 

The upside is that these more expensive stocks really move. Look at AAPL for example, watch it carefully, especially in the morning time how fast it can move. It's a beast and can move a whole dollar in just a minute or two, so if you're on the wrong side of these beasts, you can be in big trouble.

 

And please don't get me wrong, as I trade, I have my live news service on, and if I hear a really "HOT" story, I may jump on it. For example a while ago APOL reported some really bad news and the stock plummeted, or an even longer time ago GS was accused of fraud, so when you hear these "heavy duty" news, of course I may tend to jump on them and suck out as much as I popssibly can.

 

Because I'm more of a scalper than a day trader, for my style of trading it just doesn't make sense to jump areoung many stocks. When AAPL goes up, I'll quickly enter a long position, than as it goes down, I'll take it short. What I'm trying to say here is that I'm chasing the stock.

 

Bare in mind, it takes a lot of skill chasing a stock. I use "leading" indicators, not lacking ones that tell me ahead of time what's going to happen.

 

And believe you me, in about an hour, trading these beasts, you can make yourself an EASY $1 to $1.50. Now go ahead and multiply that amount by the amount of shares you trade.

 

I hope this brought some clarity to all those that negatively disagreed with me.

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.