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.

russellhq

Risk of Ruin Discussion

Recommended Posts

I'm continually astonished and amused by people who convince themselves that mentioning how successful or how much money they have made trading will somehow add validity/credence/weight to their comments. In reality, it does the exact opposite and it wreaks of desperation. Everyone knows there is no way to prove such claims...so it's pointless to make them, even if it were true. A little bit more effort in figuring out a way to make or emphasize a point without reverting to such a tactic would result in better discussions, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gosu, your post did indeed push some buttons, I found it dismissive and insulting and replied in kind. I don't feel good about that. Never mind, I appreciate the way you have responded.

 

I don't make any claim to be good. I have been successful, and I have made some fairly significant sums but, like you, it has not been a smooth road, and I am only too aware of my trading weaknesses, which I have to pay constant attention to. I certainly don't sneeze at making a million, I think it is a tremendous achievement, I'm also proud of having done it. I just didn't like the apparent assumption that you could beat me round the head with it.

 

I think we all need to be proud of our achievements -- there has to some reward other than just monetary. I had a great year in my last 12-month accounting period July-to-July -- 65%+ return on a fairly significant account with less than 6% drawdown, 11 winning months and the one losing month closed at less than one tenth of one percent down, trading daily charts. I'm proud of that, but already in my new 12-month period I am down with a nasty streak of losing trades. The markets have a way of humbling us and reminding us of reality. I don't know the future, but I do have a clearly-defined set of rules to deal with the present, and the only thing I know is that the current and recent performance of my system is still within the parameters of normality, so my job is to trade through the drawdown.

 

We all have to find a way to trade that allows us to sleep at night -- to suit our trading personality, as they say. For me, the only way is to focus on risk. To find the appropriate balance between risk and return within my system, and to know exactly the point where my system has undergone abnormal loss -- and know in advance what I will do about that. That alone is not an insignificant task and, for me, may well be the most important one. At that point, I have a plan which covers both the expected and the unexpected, and I have done everything I know to understand and manage my risk.

 

You're obviously trading in a completely different way -- and you're obviously doing great with that. You're prepared to risk blowing out an account in exchange for whatever your expected return is. I can't do that.

 

I would however disagree with this: your previous post said that you wouldn't have made your first million any quicker if you employed risk management. I think perhaps you would -- because your most recent post says that you blew out two futures accounts, one fairly sizeable. Some appropriate form of risk management would almost certainly have helped you avoid the pain of a blown out account and therefore may well have helped you to make your first million quicker...

 

Congratulations on great performance, and good luck...

 

Thanks for the thorough and thoughtful post. Also thanks for sharing your recent performance results. I'm always interested to see the results of skilled traders and how they think about their approach to trading.

 

Judging by your use of a fiscal year, I can surmise that you manage OPM, which is something I avoid entirely. That likely explains a lot of the difference in our approaches and the stats we keep.

 

As you know, my approach is discretionary, directional trading. I do not trade with preset loss parameters as you do, yet I do not consider myself a risk taker at all. I am a believer in avoiding risk and taking the low hanging fruit first prior to looking for additional opportunities. I see the market's risk/reward diagram as a scatter of points all over the graph rather than an upwardly sloping regression line with rising risk for rising reward. There are times when there is essentially no risk to extract. I call this "free money." There are also times when risk of loss is high with little available to extract unless I guess the subsequent direction correctly. I call these times "centering" and "dry up" and I am sidelined during these times because trading is not a 50/50 game to me. In between these two extremes there are various opportunities which I have been able to differentiate over the years and train myself to act accordingly when they are presented. There are still many market positions I have yet to differentiate but I am still relatively young and have many market repetitions ahead of me to learn.

 

I am describing the above as a reply to your assertion that I am prepared to risk blowing out an account to trade the way I do. Because trading is performance based, I cannot rule out the possibility. But I do know that I am only getting better the longer I trade.

 

With regard to whether applying "risk management" could have avoided my early losses, I would say that I knew at the time that "risk management" was very important and meant always having a stop loss in place and taking my losses without exception. What that got me was a disheartening grinding down of my account. I found that rather than having set stops, "scaling" in to trades achieved far better results. I would have a long string of positive days and felt that I was finally on to something until a trade came along to wipe out the gains of prior weeks and even months.

 

I no longer concern myself over "risk management", but strive to stay on the right side of the market at all times and sideline when the right side is not clear to me. Entry price is irrelevant. The lone exception is when the right side immediately becomes unclear after entry and I look to "wash" the trade with costs.

 

If I am sounding like I never record a "loss", I want to dispel that notion. I'm always working on cutting down my losses due to stubbornness, laziness, boredom, euphoria, etc., otherwise known as human errors, which always seem to be there lurking underneath the surface.

 

Cheers and continued success to you.

Edited by gosu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosu, your trading methodology sounds very like mine.

 

Judging by your use of a fiscal year, I can surmise that you manage OPM, which is something I avoid entirely...

 

Actually, I don't trade OPM. Having the freedom to record my results any way I like, I have simply started with the date of first trade I placed using my current system, and organized the trades into 12-month periods from that start date, rather than having an orphan period of something less than a year at the beginning. As far as risk-aversion, it's just that I am not so young and a lot of work has gone into building my trading capital, which I would not care to attempt to repeat.

 

I see the market's risk/reward diagram as a scatter of points all over the graph rather than an upwardly sloping regression line with rising risk for rising reward.

I agree with your view of risk. The only circumstance under which I would view it is a rising regression line is in relation to position sizing where, clearly, one is taking on proportionately more risk with larger size. UNLESS... you create your position by scaling in -- which is another matter altogether, and which is also at the heart of my methodology...

 

There are times when there is essentially no risk to extract.

I also look to identify and isolate those moments when risk is statistically minimal although, in my case, I wouldn't call it discretionary because I have reduced everything to rules.

 

I found that rather than having set stops, "scaling" in to trades achieved far better results.

Couldn't agree more. I also use scaling in, and I don't use set stops either.

 

I am more discretionary on exits. Although I do have a system indication for an exit point, I am aware that this is designed to catch a certain move and is not something which is guaranteed to unfold according to the numbers. Consequently, if it appears to me that the move has occurred without quite getting to the calculated exit point, I will watch and weigh the diminishing risk:reward and act accordingly. I have been able to 'beat' the results from the system exits fairly consistently as I get better at this.

 

So, perhaps we trade in a more similar fashion than it seemed initially!

 

Good luck for the future...

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

    • Well said. This principle is highly analogous to trading. Any human can easily click buy or sell when they "feel" that price is about to go up or down. The problem with feeling, commonly referred to as "instinctive" trading, is that it cannot be quantified. And because it cannot be quantified, it cannot be empirically tested. Instinctive trading has the lowest barrier to entry and therefore returns the lowest reward. As this is true for most things in life, this comes as no surprise. Unfortunately, the lowest barrier to entry is attractive to new traders for obvious reasons. This actually applied to me decades ago.🤭   It's only human nature to seek the highest amount of reward in exchange for the lowest amount of work. In fact, I often say that there is massive gray area between efficiency and laziness. Fortunately, losing for a living inspired me to investigate the work of Wall Street quants who refer to us as "fishfood" or "cannonfodder." Although I knew that we as retail traders cannot exploit execution rebates or queues like quants do, I learned that we can engage in automated scalp, swing, and trend trading. The thermonuclear caveat here, is that I had no idea how to write code (or program) trading algorithms. So I gravitated toward interface-based algorithm builders that required no coding knowledge (see human nature, aforementioned). In retrospect, I should never have traded code written by builder software because it's buggy and inefficient. However, my paid subscription to the builder software allowed me to view the underlying source code of the generated trading algo--which was written in MQL language. Due to a lack of customization in the builder software, I inevitably found myself editing the code. This led me to coding research which, in turn, led me to abandoning the builder software and coding custom algo's from scratch. Fast forward to the present, I can now code several trading strategies per day across 2 different platforms. Considering how inefficient manual backtesting is, coding is a huge advantage. When a new trading concept hits me, I can write the algo, backtest it, and optimize it within an hour or so--across multiple exchanges and symbols, and cycle through hundreds of different settings for each input. And then I get pages upon pages of performance metrics with the best settings pre-highlighted. Having said all of this, I am by no means an advanced programmer. IMHO, advanced programmers write API gateways, construct their own custom trading platforms, use high end computers with field programmable gateway array chips, and set up shop in close proximity to the exchanges. In any event, a considerable amount of work is required just to get toward the top of the "fishfood"/"cannonfodder" pool. Another advantage of coding is that it forces me to write trade entry and exit conditions (triggers) in black & white, thereby causing me to think microscopically about my precise trade trigger conditions. For example, I have to decide whether the algo should track the slope, angle, and level of each bar price and indicator to be used. Typing a hard number like 50 degrees of angle into code is a lot different than merely looking at a chart myself and saying, that's close enough.  Code doesn't acknowledge "maybe" nor "feelings." Either the math (code) works (is profitable) or doesn't work (is a loser). It doesn't get angry, sad, nor overly optimistic. And it can trade virtually 24 hours per day, 5 days per week. If you learn to code, you'll eventually reach a point where coding an algo that trades as you intended provides its own sense of accomplishment. Soon after, making money in the market merely becomes a side effect of your new job--coding. This is how I compete, at least for now, in this wide world of trading. I highly recommend it.  
    • VRA Vera Bradley stock watch, pull back to 5.08 support area at https://stockconsultant.com/?VRA
    • MU Micron stock watch, pull back to 102.83 gap support area with high trade quality at https://stockconsultant.com/?MU
    • ACLX Arcellx stock watch, trending at 84.6 support area with bullish indicators at https://stockconsultant.com/?ACLX
    • Here’s something few are talking about: The Chinese are printing money like it's going out of style. Not that you'd hear about it in the mainstream news. But Bitcoin knows.   Bitcoin always knows.   Here’s the thing…   When the Chinese government prints money to paper over the cracks, their smart money doesn't sit around waiting to get devalued.   It usually flows into three things: Bitcoin, gold, and dollars.   After years of being beaten down, gold's having one of its best years in decades. But here's the secret -- whatever gold does, Bitcoin's going to do it bigger.   Much bigger.   Since last November, when China started their printing spree, Bitcoin's been moving in near-perfect correlation with the People's Bank of China's balance sheet. Over 80% correlation, maybe even 90%.   Again, few are talking about it.   But here's why this matters right now: This could be the beginning of a huge breakout in the crypto markets.   Bitcoin broke above its July high, and historically, that's led to new all-time highs over 90% of the time. The only times it failed? COVID and the 2022 bear market.   That's it.” – Chris Campbell   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.