The CL/NQ experiment
- Thread starter Gabe2004
- Start date
I review and log all my trades. I used to make notes as to if the set up was valid and why I got out; target hit, at S/R, price reversal, bad read etc. It's a good learning process. Now that I have stricter trade management rules there's less noting why I got out.
Quote from jas_in_hbca:
let me know what you think. Several reasons to stay in trade.
and maybe ND can confirm ?
Absolutely, if you short the initial break out of support (first entry), expect the retest. I realized at some point in my futures trading that I was moving my stop to b/e too quick on trades and getting shaken out, so after much contemplation and study I decided to (most of the time) risk missing out on a move altogether by waiting for second entries, which I call being the second mouse.
If you're the first mouse there are a couple risks: one is that it's a fake out and you're trapped; two is that the trade moves favorably right away, you think it's going straight to target and you move the stop to b/e and get shaken out.
If you're the second mouse, the advantage is that you can gauge how price reacts to the break of a level and if the break is very weak you can wait for clarity instead of getting stuck in a mousetrap. If the break is significant, you place a limit order at, or near, the breakout level and hope for a fill, or find some other method of entry after the retest of the level.
The disadvantage is that if you don't get a fill, you either miss the move or end up entering at a worse price.
I got filled on the retrace of the trade you got shaken out of (94.54 @ 9:47 ET). However, later I missed getting filled on a trade by 1 tick and there was no other opportunity to get in at a price that allowed favorable R:R to my target.
I'm pretty sure that over time, the end result of the two methods is quite similar. It comes down to what best fits your mindset.
Psychologically 3 contracts are the optimal number for me (not that my trading reflects that, but...)
1st exit is to cover expenses and to feel good (fixed number based on historical testing).
2nd contract is to make $$$ (exit at a technical reason).
3rd contract is a runner. From what I saw, this 3rd contract, most of the time, achieves results smaller than the 2nd contract but on occasion it can bring in very large gains.
It is very frustrating to have no bullets left on a trend day.
Gabe
1st exit is to cover expenses and to feel good (fixed number based on historical testing).
2nd contract is to make $$$ (exit at a technical reason).
3rd contract is a runner. From what I saw, this 3rd contract, most of the time, achieves results smaller than the 2nd contract but on occasion it can bring in very large gains.
It is very frustrating to have no bullets left on a trend day.
Gabe
Just seen your curve:
is it possible for you to put in here
for each loss :
- trade size, pip loss?
is it possible for you to put in here
for each loss :
- trade size, pip loss?
Quote from Gabe2004:
Psychologically 3 contracts are the optimal number for me (not that my trading reflects that, but...)
Two experienced futures traders independently told me to learn to be consistently profitable trading a single contract. They said if I couldn't find a way to profit trading one lot, I should not even consider more than one.
So that's what I did.
As a result of only having a single "bullet", I learned to trade without the sort of "cheating" that multiple lots allow, and ended up sticking with the method I developed under that single lot constraint.
OP, Just so I don't have to go through 30 pages looking for it, do you spell out your entry/exit rules anywhere?
Over the years, I have found the CL an interesting market to day trade, but it can really punish you.
Over the years, I have found the CL an interesting market to day trade, but it can really punish you.