Re-entry after profit-taking

[murray t turtle]

Is that the hamster wheel of bad discretionary decisions?!

%%
SURE can be LOL
I like , speaking of circles a 200 pound deer makes a bigger circle than a 5 pound rabbit.
Like UPRO, may not get again for long while -- i was thinking about sellin' the position in SEPT anyway, so exit early , + exit some QQQ related late .UPRO has bigger circles than QQQ for me
As far as daytrade I do stuff like ;
PSQ is a 80% sell + SH [+ related] is an 80% sell on barchart. WOW if they are that close /I most likely do better with SH , daytrades .[BUT I usually do better short term-daytrades with SH + related than PSQ related ; longer longs, longer profits on qqq+ related for me]
I seldom enter again a QQQ rabbit moves daytrades- last 30 minutes

 

[Dollardogs]

I would not recommend to re-enter if you’re day trading and if you have a tendency to enter fairly late into moves. The reason is that because the later you enter, the closer you’ll be to the daily range which one always need to keep an eye on when intraday trading (unless you trade VLTF where the ATR is not a factor). Only you can answer that.

Also, if there is no pattern (your edge) at that (re-entry) price level, then all you’d be doing is leaning on the edge that occurred X points before your re-entry level. It doesn’t sound like low-risk entry.

How about just scaling out, and keeping on a runner?

Or maybe consider a to re-enter with much smaller size ONLY if there is a tight consolidation after thrust (i.e.: a continuation pattern), and the market dynamics are strong, and there is still lots of room left in the daily range, etc, Otherwise there would no edge in it.

I do like this advice in principle, but I've never taken to situational sizing. I find it very messy and hard to track, so all my trades are at the same size, because at a certain point I'm just like if you trust the decision, you should trust it at any size, no?

But your point about the only edge at re-entry point is the prior edge anyway is harder to argue. I'll have to think about that one more.

 

[Dollardogs]

All depends on your qualifications as a daytrader. It can go from full disaster till skyrocketing profits. I do it almost every day. When I have time I will show with an excel some example later. Now trading , so no time now.

Thanks look forward to seeing any examples you wouldn't mind sharing. I'll post some chart examples too.

 

[murray t turtle]

%%
UPRO, No not so much reenter,50dma chart may or may not hold;
SH + related looked better + was .
May renter SPYV, most likely not for daytrade; even though I sometime turn a good investment into a daytrade.
I always wondered if some one that turned[unplanned ] a bad '' daytrade in to an investment'' IF they ever had many good investments ??=maybe notLOL

 

[Georpe]

I do like this advice in principle, but I've never taken to situational sizing. I find it very messy and hard to track, so all my trades are at the same size, because at a certain point I'm just like if you trust the decision, you should trust it at any size, no?

Are you trading to be right, or trading to make money?

 

[Dollardogs]

Are you trading to be right, or trading to make money?

Non sequitur. I'm trading to make money, which requires trading a system that suits my strengths and weaknesses, last I checked.

 

[deaddog]

Non sequitur. I'm trading to make money, which requires trading a system that suits my strengths and weaknesses, last I checked.

And what are your strenghts and weaknesses?

 

[Georpe]

Non sequitur.

In time you’ll find that’s not true. Or maybe you won’t. Best of luck

 

[Bad_Badness]

Non sequitur. I'm trading to make money, which requires trading a system that suits my strengths and weaknesses, last I checked.

Actually the question is sequitor. If you are trading to make money then you will be using sizing. If you are trading to be right, just once, with fixed size, then it is more about being right.

I.e. you can make more money with sizing relative to equivalent "being right", all other things being equal. Hope this makes sense.

The thing that is wrong about the original question is thinking in terms of a monolithic trade. Alternatively thinking, when you use an Algo to trade and actually have fixed rules that make a formal (alog) system, you then are hit with the epiphany there are millions of trades, millions of entries and exits in any chart. Then, when you start changing time frames, you realize there are literally billions of trades in a day, one could have a system to trade.

"Circling the wagons" around a single trade-setup-entry-exit is what people do when they trades like it is 1970. In the 70's, a single "ticket" represents a trade. Now the same paradigm is a web interface with a series of drop down menus. But ultimately it reduces down, and is the same as, filling in a ticket or multiple tickets (OCA orders).

It is understandable if you trade with a "ticket" paradigm based computer interface, which most people do, then you want to "circle the wagons" around a single trade.

Imagine for a moment, that all decisions for entry and exit are automated and there is no "mental tax", no speed delay, no hesitation, no indecision, then reconsider the original question.

Hope that helps to answer the original question. @Georpe is correct.

PS: "I'm trading to make money, which requires trading a system that suits my strengths and weaknesses" is also true. But the question you asked is a Sisyphus' task, doing it that way.

 

[SunTrader]

Better to play to ... the markets strengths and weaknesses.