Quote from cooper1308:
Good to hear Doc!!!
I'm long NMR short CS last week which was an absolute disaster..... My first proper black swan. Still in trade will re-evaluate this week...
Have you got anything to add re: The stop debate?
I'l interject and throw a couple of comments forward...
I've found that a stop loss (whether volatility or fixed % based) will dampen down returns, but it shoud also smooth out volatility. I'm coming round to the view that it is necessary, even if the backtesting suggests its not optimal. Why?
1/ Concerns over the 'pre-selective' nature of the universe of stocks backtested.
2/ Avoiding the black swan
3/ I accept that it sharp bull markets, mean reversion strategies are likely to suffer. Therefore this strategy may be directional. The stop loss will likely help limit losses under this scenario. This month is a good example because we saw a strong bull market. Here are my numbers so far for trades opened in Sep (n=32)...
2% stop loss W/L Ratio=.91 Prob=.59 (positive)
3% stop loss W/L Ratio=.59 Prob=.59 (negative)
4% stop loss W/L Ratio=.6 Prob=.63 (slightly positive)
No stop loss W/L Ratio=.52 Prob=.63 (negative)
So we see that, whereas previously the results were linear with the no-stop loss being optimal, this month this relationship breaks down.
It's not enough data to conclude anything meaningful, but I'm beginning to think that a stop loss is necessary to mitigate losses in unhelpful market conditions.