Scaling in to winning trades

After reflecting on this question for a bit, I do have another question. Instead of scaling into winners, why not just take individual positions one at a time with fixed profit/stop?
The main reason is that once you take your profit on the initial trade, the trade is over.
Let your winners run. Adding to a position that is moving in your direction accomplishes this.
Entering a trade with a small or partial position keeps your losses small when you are wrong and you only add to the trade when you are right.
FWIW: I'm referring to swing trading equities.
 
...

My thoughts...
Though stock trading is legally a business,

Stock trading in and of itself is not legally anything, especially not a business. A business may engage in the activity of stock trading, but one does not have to be incorporated as a business or LLC or partnership whathaveyou, LEGALLY, to engage in it.
 
Stock trading in and of itself is not legally anything, especially not a business. A business may engage in the activity of stock trading, but one does not have to be incorporated as a business or LLC or partnership whathaveyou, LEGALLY, to engage in it.
You treat Stock Trading as a Business though. The Inventory you buy needs to be in high Demand.
 
Stock trading in and of itself is not legally anything, especially not a business. A business may engage in the activity of stock trading, but one does not have to be incorporated as a business or LLC or partnership whathaveyou, LEGALLY, to engage in it.

The Income Tax Department of India clearly states that any trading capital that represents a profit has to be considered as a business income
 
After reflecting on this question for a bit, I do have another question. Instead of scaling into winners, why not just take individual positions one at a time with fixed profit/stop? In a given trend, you could have a few trades in a row with profits rather than trying to work out a single position with multiple entries.

ps.
I didn't mention scaling into losers cause it's the most fucked up way of trading that's been taught over generations. It's just garbage period. You feel good cause you're capturing consistency due to reversion, but after few weeks/months, you'll be fucked royally by a stubborn trade. Don't do it!

Actually I did treat all the trades separately, though not with a fixed target. I set the stops the same (below the start of the uptrend - though I would never have let the market get to that stop if it looked as if the trend were over), but I'm not a fan of targets. Trader Tom interestingly isn't either. It seems to me that you should take profits when it looks as if there is not much more to be gained, rather than at some pre-defined level. Al Brooks tries to quantify reasonable targets with his measured move stuff, but I'm not entirely convinced by it, though he may well be right as I am sure he is a better trader than me. Setting them by some arbitrary risk/reward ratio also seems odd to me. The market might give you one point, it might give you twenty, who knows?

So I exited some of the trades when they had made a reasonable profit, and held some for longer in case they went further. It seems to me that another advantage of scaling in is that you can scale out as well.

As for scaling in to losers; I have had similar royal experiences with stubborn trades of which you speak in simulation, so I am wary of it. Still, I think there may be some mileage in it if it is done carefully with a clear head. Tricky when you are under water though.
 
You guys gotta understand, Trading is really BIG in India atm, bit like you Guys and Guns and shooting at each other.

Don't listen to these Mericans, @rajesheck , they play that weird game with an over-sized Toothpick. They wouldn't even know who Sunil Gavaskar, Sachin Tendulkar or Shane Warne was.
 
I only trade a very small size with a small account, but today I successfully scaled in to a winning trade for the first time. This feels like a bit of a game changer to me. I read about it recently in Best Loser Wins by Trader Tom (Tom Hougaard), which I can very much recommend.

Most of us here have probably had that wonderful (but fleeting) feeling when we are on the right side of a fast moving trade. The market is clearly urgently looking for a new level, and it is in these few moments that I think scaling in could be a good technique (though probably not for a beginner).

I exited all the positions once the trades began to falter, as clearly a fast move up can quickly be followed by a fast reversal in a volatile market.

Interestingly, Al Brooks remarks in his video course that he very rarely scales in to winners, as it increases risk, and also increases your average entry level for a bull trade. He does not however advise against doing it, just says it is not for him. He is a keen proponent of scaling in to losing positions though, provided your original premise for the trade is still valid, and the market has reversed back in your favour from a lower position. Other posters here have used this technique with success, though it certainly needs to be handled with care, as your mind can use it to justify holding on to bad trades which is clearly not a good idea.

Scaling in, in general, seems to be a technique employed by more experienced traders. Any thoughts here on it?

Adding to winners will make your returns lumpier: deeper and longer-duration DDs but more impressive winning streaks.

My approach is to manage based on signals. If you are long, and the market flashes another long signal, add to the position and manage & account for the add as a separate trade.
 
Adding to winners will make your returns lumpier: deeper and longer-duration DDs but more impressive winning streaks.
Why deeper drawdowns? If you are managing your position properly the losses should be small.
One big winner makes up for a lot of small losses.
I suppose if you are only trading one instrument like ES a losing streak will cause a deep drawdown.
With stocks I am diversified (Up to 10 positions) and my account value rarely has a drawdown over 5%
 
You guys gotta understand, Trading is really BIG in India atm, bit like you Guys and Guns and shooting at each other.

Don't listen to these Mericans, @rajesheck , they play that weird game with an over-sized Toothpick. They wouldn't even know who Sunil Gavaskar, Sachin Tendulkar or Shane Warne was.


Hey Good luck to both India and Australia on WTC!! Today final fifth day of the Ultimate Test Match at Oval!

I am a big fan of these three:
Mohammad Ali, Bruce Lee and Don Bradman
(I see Manny Pacquiao (Pacman) as boxing version of Bruce Lee)

Ofcourse Sachin Tendulkar vs Shane Warne episodes are epic of this century!

All these legends showed the magic of Flow State in sports and martial arts to the world.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top