The CL/NQ experiment
- Thread starter Gabe2004
- Start date
4 trades today.
Trade #1was derived from an alternate data source (primary data source did not show a valid setup) - not profitable.
Trade #2 was in a non standard timeframe (setup was valid) - not profitable. (after the big run-up I was looking for a reason to catch the train while it was moving)
Entered trades #'s 3 and 4 by the book.
Trade #3 hit target (automatic exit).
Trade #4 was close enough and exited manually.
There were another 4 valid set ups during the day and 1 so-so trade that I did not take.
This week I started to analyze my trades manually rather then rely on Ninja.
I found that Ninja has "LIMITATIONS" that skewed my stats as to MAE and MFE.
Trade #1was derived from an alternate data source (primary data source did not show a valid setup) - not profitable.
Trade #2 was in a non standard timeframe (setup was valid) - not profitable. (after the big run-up I was looking for a reason to catch the train while it was moving)
Entered trades #'s 3 and 4 by the book.
Trade #3 hit target (automatic exit).
Trade #4 was close enough and exited manually.
There were another 4 valid set ups during the day and 1 so-so trade that I did not take.
This week I started to analyze my trades manually rather then rely on Ninja.
I found that Ninja has "LIMITATIONS" that skewed my stats as to MAE and MFE.
While reading some of the posts here I noticed that many people advocate looking at trading as a business and to leave the ego behind.
I also noticed that people refer to the outcome of their trades in terms of winning and losing.
I think that a more appropriate way of describing the outcomes of trades should be using the words PROFITABLE and NON PROFITABLE.
Just like in business.
I have never seen a financial statement saying that the past year a company had many winners but I did see large profits.
(excluding description of products in which case a WINNING product is sort of a norm)
Gabe
I also noticed that people refer to the outcome of their trades in terms of winning and losing.
I think that a more appropriate way of describing the outcomes of trades should be using the words PROFITABLE and NON PROFITABLE.
Just like in business.
I have never seen a financial statement saying that the past year a company had many winners but I did see large profits.
(excluding description of products in which case a WINNING product is sort of a norm)
Gabe
As I wrote in a previous post, b/c of the fact that some of my stats were not correct (Ninja limitations) my targets and stops were off the mark.
I am reworking them manually.
A higher fixed target and smaller SL is what seems to be emerging.
The 3rd contract would allow me to have a runner.
I am thinking of trailing the 2nd contract and raising the minimum target on the 1st.
And on the subject of keeping trades longer; a question popped into my head. How much is enough.
What I mean is, how much profit per day is enough?
If a system gives X $ as profit without much stress, is a modified system that gives more profit with more stress, worth it?
Since we have no ego therefore we humbly accept we DON"T know what the market will definitely do... "let that which took you in take you out".. i.e. a signal indicating the current trade is no longer valid. How much profit is enough is really not in our control... We CAN however limit the profit chasing comfort.
Granted this is difficult to do BUT the following should make it easier:
1. You have taken profit on 2/3 and now have B/E on the runner.
2. You are in SIM... THIS is the way to practice this, otherwise it will be completely impossible with real money..
The ability to operate with discomfort is what separates "them" from us. Comfort tends to equal low profits and wrong trades..
from a fellow struggling trader that has committed these crimes..
