Cant answer any questions,can you....
FWIW,you are sooooo close to getting on ET's Top 10 Piker list
FWIW,you are sooooo close to getting on ET's Top 10 Piker list
OMG I can't believe this fallacy still exists in trading!
- Thread starter wxytrader
- Start date
The article being referred to at the beginning of this topic picked a 50% drop only as an example to show the math...not as an example of a capitulation. The traders fallacy IS the math being presented in the article. Price action is only affected by external forces of the market...not by YOUR portfolios P/L percentages.
I mean ok stock has dropped 50% from $10 to $5. You have lost 50% so your portfolio has to increase by 100% to break even...however I got in at $3 so I'm still profitable. Price action can't cater to both of us ..for you it is apparently hindered by math...for me it is not.
Last edited:
I know where you are going with this,but you are confusing arguments...
Whether you know it or not,you are basically presenting the Value Investor/DCF argument against utilising stops..
And even the Minervini/Canslim crowd would "somewhat" agree with your I got in at 3,it went to 10,Im not selling at 5...
HOWEVER,that argument has ZERO to do with buying at 10 , holding herman and watching the stock trade down to 5....
Its clear you have never really traded.You can not answer simple questions regarding "price action",yet blather on about price channels...
Dum Dum,what more likely,a stock trading down 50%, then retracing 100 or trading down an additional 50%????
And lets not get into compounding
Whether you know it or not,you are basically presenting the Value Investor/DCF argument against utilising stops..
And even the Minervini/Canslim crowd would "somewhat" agree with your I got in at 3,it went to 10,Im not selling at 5...
HOWEVER,that argument has ZERO to do with buying at 10 , holding herman and watching the stock trade down to 5....
Its clear you have never really traded.You can not answer simple questions regarding "price action",yet blather on about price channels...
Dum Dum,what more likely,a stock trading down 50%, then retracing 100 or trading down an additional 50%????
And lets not get into compounding
A stock can only move up or down one tick at a time. It doesn't concern itself with P/L. Therefore neither should you to determine the probability of a stock returning to any level based on your P/L. This is the fallacy ..you are trying to use your own P/L as a way to determine the probability the stock can return to break even....(for you)...totally irrelevant.
That's nobel prize worthy observation right there!
Let's not forget You were talking about 50% price moves. As i said before, channels in short timeframes/ low point ranges are a different story because the % change is very small and thus has almost non existing impact due other factors/traders/strategies also in play at the same time. Which is why i said that, within those conditions, you were "right" but still for the wrong reasons.
What a Dumwipe! You take a small loss and then get back in on the next buy signal again using a small stop loss and let a winner, if you get it, run to maturity. The issue never has to get back to the same price level.
CMON!!!!!!!!
No one is this dumb,not even an Elliot Waver/Prechtologist...
In your case a 50% drawdown is meaningless as you dont trade...Its a fictional chapter in your
"Traders Fallacy guide to Financial RUIN " ..You,the author, are the one who wrote/dreamt that a stock that declines 50% can EASILY go up 100%...
Num Nut, prsent a probability distribution illustrating that stocks cut in half ,subsequently double..EASILY..
What Vol are you plugging in?? What time frame???
CRICKETS
No one is this dumb,not even an Elliot Waver/Prechtologist...
In your case a 50% drawdown is meaningless as you dont trade...Its a fictional chapter in your
"Traders Fallacy guide to Financial RUIN " ..You,the author, are the one who wrote/dreamt that a stock that declines 50% can EASILY go up 100%...
Num Nut, prsent a probability distribution illustrating that stocks cut in half ,subsequently double..EASILY..
What Vol are you plugging in?? What time frame???
CRICKETS
It wasnt easy,but you somehow managed to post the DUMBEST "belief" in the history of ET..
Yeah,except when it gaps down 50%
Shame on me for debating with a noob
..
Yeah,except when it gaps down 50%
Shame on me for debating with a noob
Last edited: