Some of come to yield signs instead and when we do,
we drop some folks off, put our seatbelt back on and continue on the direction we were heading without any risk to the passengers that have left the ride.
"Scaling out" is inferior behavior
- Thread starter Buy1Sell2
- Start date
Some of come to yield signs instead and when we do,
we drop some folks off, put our seatbelt back on and continue on the direction we were heading without any risk to the passengers that have left the ride.
This thread is a classic example of the difference between those who "trade" via hindsight and those who trade in real time.
It also highlights the difference between those who trade for real and those who trade theoretical constructs which are based on backtests and on what they've read.
LC
It also highlights the difference between those who trade for real and those who trade theoretical constructs which are based on backtests and on what they've read.
LC
dumb thread.
look, there is no one RIGHT WAY.
also, it depends on the instrument you trade, your risk parameters, your target parameters, your time frame, etc. etc. etc.
i trade futures.
i make my income doing so.
90% of my futures trade volume is intraday scalps.
i never (certainly less than 1/100 of my trades) add to a winning position.
i scale out.
it works, and i make an excellent income. but it's within my overall methodology.
with other instruments, etc. i do add to winning trades. stocks come to mind. in certain types of trades.
but these dumb arguments like "never add to a losing trade", "never scale out" blah blah blah are just a bunch of ego traders (and ego traders usually lose money to professionals in the long run) trying to extrapolate from the individual to the aggregate.
traders start making money when they develop a methodology with an edge, and manage their risk, such that the edge can work out over time.
if your methodology allows you to add to winning trades, more power to you.
when i INVEST (vs. trade) I add to winning and losing INVESTMENTS. that's the methodology.
futures, at least index futures, on an intraday basis - TEND to rotate around value, to use market trader parlance. adding to winning trades (imo and ime) based on my time frame for being in trades (3 seconds to a few hours) more often than not result in me buying near a top, or selling near a bottom. scaling out results in profits being locked in, and my trades becoming "riskless" when my stop is gradually moved in the direction of the trade.
that works for me. i am not going to say it's right or wrong, for all instruments, on all time frames.
so, arguments like this are dumb.
but i'm engaging in it, so what does that say about me ?
look, there is no one RIGHT WAY.
also, it depends on the instrument you trade, your risk parameters, your target parameters, your time frame, etc. etc. etc.
i trade futures.
i make my income doing so.
90% of my futures trade volume is intraday scalps.
i never (certainly less than 1/100 of my trades) add to a winning position.
i scale out.
it works, and i make an excellent income. but it's within my overall methodology.
with other instruments, etc. i do add to winning trades. stocks come to mind. in certain types of trades.
but these dumb arguments like "never add to a losing trade", "never scale out" blah blah blah are just a bunch of ego traders (and ego traders usually lose money to professionals in the long run) trying to extrapolate from the individual to the aggregate.
traders start making money when they develop a methodology with an edge, and manage their risk, such that the edge can work out over time.
if your methodology allows you to add to winning trades, more power to you.
when i INVEST (vs. trade) I add to winning and losing INVESTMENTS. that's the methodology.
futures, at least index futures, on an intraday basis - TEND to rotate around value, to use market trader parlance. adding to winning trades (imo and ime) based on my time frame for being in trades (3 seconds to a few hours) more often than not result in me buying near a top, or selling near a bottom. scaling out results in profits being locked in, and my trades becoming "riskless" when my stop is gradually moved in the direction of the trade.
that works for me. i am not going to say it's right or wrong, for all instruments, on all time frames.
so, arguments like this are dumb.
but i'm engaging in it, so what does that say about me ?
Quote from whitster:
traders start making money when they develop a methodology with an edge, and manage their risk, such that the edge can work out over time.
Sweet
edit: for every poster (and poser) on this thread there are going to be anywhere from 10 - 100 readers of the thread. just wanna make sure they can get to the meat.
Who said they left early ? I took them to the promised destination, half chose to exit, and the other half tipped me extremely well for taking them further into the journey than the original plan.