How would you play this type of resistance

[tomorton]

Sort of martingale stuff, but good job on playing with risk and ignoring targets, get the max from the current stock rally.

This is the opposite of Martingale.

 

[pipeguy]

This is the opposite of Martingale.

Opposite to martingale is not to trade at all, I mean guaranteed loss and guaranteed deposit untouched is the very trade-off where many traders go wrong.
What are your results in the long run? Above breakeven?

 

[tomorton]

Opposite to martingale is not to trade at all, I mean guaranteed loss and guaranteed deposit untouched is the very trade-off where many traders go wrong.
What are your results in the long run? Above breakeven?

Martingale demands enlarging losing positions, increasing capital risk. Pyramiding means adding to winning positions, without increasing capital risk beyond initial limited amount. If this wasn't long-term profitable, I wouldn't have mentioned it. But note that it can only be profitable long-term, as it depends on a small percentage of continuing trends that make exceptional returns possible.

 

[pipeguy]

Martingale demands enlarging losing positions, increasing capital risk. Pyramiding means adding to winning positions, without increasing capital risk beyond initial limited amount. If this wasn't long-term profitable, I wouldn't have mentioned it. But note that it can only be profitable long-term, as it depends on a small percentage of continuing trends that make exceptional returns possible.

What you say is determining an inception of very long-term trend positive for you and adding increment bids as it evolves in the right side. In my view it becomes extremely difficult to determine what you should when original position is still in profit, while next one caught by short-term trend reversal and goes into negative. Gains from former position works as collateral to latter if we take capital untouched. Instead of taking on decision you take two - what to do with the position which is in profit and second which may lose.

You can with same ease open on big long-term position which lot size equal to the sum of "pyramided" ones, saving on transaction costs.

It just don't make sense to me to use incremental bidding on trend in terms of complicatedness of multiple decision making

 

[ElectricSavant]

proactive trading Vs. reactive trading is directly related to the timeframe used imho

What you say is determining an inception of very long-term trend positive for you and adding increment bids as it evolves in the right side. In my view it becomes extremely difficult to determine what you should when original position is still in profit, while next one caught by short-term trend reversal and goes into negative. Gains from former position works as collateral to latter if we take capital untouched. Instead of taking on decision you take two - what to do with the position which is in profit and second which may lose.

You can with same ease open on big long-term position which lot size equal to the sum of "pyramided" ones, saving on transaction costs.

It just don't make sense to me to use incremental bidding on trend in terms of complicatedness of multiple decision making

 

[murray t turtle]

This is a stock that has doubled and halved repeatedly in the last 5 years. This is a lottery-type stock which I would personally avoid. You could play it using regular TA but I suspect it would be hard to trade due to spreads and unpredictable price quote moves. Or you could just take a small position using money you can afford to lose and wait for it to double: it might.

Either way, price is in the highest part of its range over the last 1 year, 2 years and year-to-date, so the odds are you'd be over-paying for a long position at this time.

I'd never consider shorting a stock that's so volatile.

%%
And since the market[SPY+ QQQ.....] is in a bull market; not a good uptrender@ all. And when you have much bigger sell volume/candles. in a sideways= slop chop trend; i would keep looking. Have seen better longs + shorts this year .NOT a prediction.

 

[pipeguy]

proactive trading Vs. reactive trading is directly related to the timeframe used imho

Yep correct. Time, risk and excess returns are main things which present complications, according to this article http://brokerarena.com/forex-education/carry-trade-strategy-tutorial/

 

[murray t turtle]

This is a stock that has doubled and halved repeatedly in the last 5 years. This is a lottery-type stock which I would personally avoid. You could play it using regular TA but I suspect it would be hard to trade due to spreads and unpredictable price quote moves. Or you could just take a small position using money you can afford to lose and wait for it to double: it might.

Either way, price is in the highest part of its range over the last 1 year, 2 years and year-to-date, so the odds are you'd be over-paying for a long position at this time.

I'd never consider shorting a stock that's so volatile.

%%
@20/20 hindsight it looks good for 1999[$100/+; BUT 1999 winners MSFT+ some other winners are still doing fine. BUT moving from 2 to $5 in two days + when they slop +stall around $5, its real tricky for shorts + longs.

 

[Xela]

It just don't make sense to me

No disrespect, but I think we kind of gathered that when you used the words "sort of Martingale stuff": it has absolutely nothing to do with that at all ... more the opposite, in a sense.

... to use incremental bidding on trend in terms of complicatedness of multiple decision making

It isn't that, either.

It's simply a very valid and reasonable method of adding to already-winning positions, without ever increasing the net risk beyond that at the point of the original entry.

 

[murray t turtle]

No disrespect, but I think we kind of gathered that when you used the words "sort of Martingale stuff": it has absolutely nothing to do with that at all ... more the opposite, in a sense.





It isn't that, either.

It's simply a very valid and reasonable method of adding to already-winning positions, without ever increasing the net risk beyond that at the point of the original entry.

%%
The people that profit, on ''sorta like Martingale stuff'' really dont consider it gambling. Some Large funds scale in, even if the price goes down-[ within strict limits like 1/+%....] but that works better if one is paid on gross assets; + Ela most dont do it with stock under $5, too much like lotto.

Another problem; the funds that do that may buy something, like, do it with dividends, no disrespect, but that one has never paid dividends. Good question cash Clay, Mr Pipe; overhead supply, can get one in trouble; even if 1999 buyers are out.