ES Journal - 2014

My stops are never a set amount, let the chart tell me where to place them. Set SL's like "8 ticks" on every trade never made any sense to me. Why should every trade be 8 ticks when 11 or 14 be better depending on past price history?

human logic suggests one can place stops "outside" of random noise = key support & resistance which differs for every trade

extensive mathematical back-testing always proves that variable stops offer no higher win % than basic fixed-dollar stops, providing each measure is roughly equal to one another. Obviously a 2-tick fixed stop tested against an 8 to 11-tick variable stop is purposely skewed results. But if you run analysis on an 8-tick fixed stop versus anything you can dream of that's variable, 8-tick fixed will be equal to superior over time.

logic & reason usually fail to pan out when it pertains to trading. One proven case time and again is the idea of fixed stops versus variable stops to limit risk over time. This is more true today than ever before, with HFTs designed to whip lower-low and higher-high swings before immediate reversal of price direction once those "protected" stops get chopped out.
 
i note that whilst es was up on friday and making new record highs, tf was DOWN and no where near record highs!

if you are going to short an equity index, short the weakest which is probably tf. Shorting the strongest i.e. es doesn't make sense.
 
human logic suggests one can place stops "outside" of random noise = key support & resistance which differs for every trade

Yes, that is my point but you said it better.

extensive mathematical back-testing always proves that variable stops offer no higher win % than basic fixed-dollar stops, providing each measure is roughly equal to one another. Obviously a 2-tick fixed stop tested against an 8 to 11-tick variable stop is purposely skewed results. But if you run analysis on an 8-tick fixed stop versus anything you can dream of that's variable, 8-tick fixed will be equal to superior over time.

logic & reason usually fail to pan out when it pertains to trading. One proven case time and again is the idea of fixed stops versus variable stops to limit risk over time. This is more true today than ever before, with HFTs designed to whip lower-low and higher-high swings before immediate reversal of price direction once those "protected" stops get chopped out.
If this is true it's certainly counter-intuitive. Can't say I believe that a carefully place stop "outside of noise" fairs worse or even money vs an arbitrary fixed stop that doesn't take into account past price history (ie, S/R, candle structure etc). If such a thing as S/R exists and is valid, then how can what you claim be true:confused:
 
SPX daily...another megaphone, 3rd touch. if it holds sub 1800's in the near future

When the target is so ample, we can just wait for price to confirm a nice turn and then take it.

In my experience, these can bend, even break and conver resistance to support, I know, a great accomplishment, but this bull has done it time and time again; so imo a little confirmation is in order.
 
Yes, that is my point but you said it better.

If this is true it's certainly counter-intuitive. Can't say I believe that a carefully place stop "outside of noise" fairs worse or even money vs an arbitrary fixed stop that doesn't take into account past price history (ie, S/R, candle structure etc). If such a thing as S/R exists and is valid, then how can what you claim be true:confused:


I actually think the market is an expert stop hunter and actually aims for those so called, stops outside the range of noise.
 
Back
Top