The question may seems dumb ,

Dashby · Jul 18, 2023

Lets say,I have two trading accounts and hypothetically trade the same instrument on both accounts every day. If I initiate a long position on one account, I initiate a short position on the other account simultaneously at the same price with the same position size. Is there a way to balance the profits and losses on both accounts? Additionally, is it possible to ensure that one account always has a profitable position while the other account always has a losing position, even though the trades are taken randomly? I have tried to solve this using position sizing, but I am not able to do so
if there a way to do this with more than two accounts with the same outcome ?
thanks

Overnight · Jul 18, 2023

Dashby said:
...Additionally, is it possible to ensure that one account always has a profitable position while the other account always has a losing position...

Sure. Just leave them there forever, and one side will always be winning, with the other always losing.

mikeriley · Jul 18, 2023

Taking into account commission and fees will eventually lead to 0.

Drawdown Addict · Jul 18, 2023

Dashby said:
Lets say,I have two trading accounts and hypothetically trade the same instrument on both accounts every day. If I initiate a long position on one account, I initiate a short position on the other account simultaneously at the same price with the same position size. Is there a way to balance the profits and losses on both accounts? Additionally, is it possible to ensure that one account always has a profitable position while the other account always has a losing position, even though the trades are taken randomly? I have tried to solve this using position sizing, but I am not able to do so
if there a way to do this with more than two accounts with the same outcome ?
thanks

This is what I do, mostly. The trick is to cut loses on the losing one and keep the winner running. Easier said than done, but you have something on your side: Trends normally continue steady for a couple of days, so there is that. On average if you keep the winner running for longer than the loser, it should generate a positive net amount. The result is a surviving algo that yields very little profits. Better than nothing.

mervyn · Jul 18, 2023

Assuming your accounts are big enough, long trades keep it on with fatter price target, short trades cut losses quickly. Small accounts, net zero intraday.

Drawdown Addict · Jul 18, 2023

mervyn said:
Assuming your accounts are big enough, long trades keep it on with fatter price target, short trades cut losses quickly. Small accounts, net zero intraday.

Micro futures with 10 contracts per side. It doesn't have to be that big.

ETJ · Jul 18, 2023

In the US it's a fool's errand from both a tax and profitability standpoint. Civil fraud and potentially criminal fraud. The laws in your home country may be different.

There are dozens of threads discussing it.

TheDawn · Jul 18, 2023

Dashby said:
Lets say,I have two trading accounts and hypothetically trade the same instrument on both accounts every day. If I initiate a long position on one account, I initiate a short position on the other account simultaneously at the same price with the same position size. Is there a way to balance the profits and losses on both accounts? Additionally, is it possible to ensure that one account always has a profitable position while the other account always has a losing position, even though the trades are taken randomly? I have tried to solve this using position sizing, but I am not able to do so
if there a way to do this with more than two accounts with the same outcome ?
thanks

Well since both positions have the same delta of 1 which means they move by the same magnitude by 1 unit change in price, then they are the perfect hedge to each other, i.e. when you are making $1 in profit on one, you are making a loss of exactly $1 on the other and vice versa so the net result is $0 profit/loss if you keep them there with the same position size. You can, like @Drawdown Addict suggested to cut your losses early as soon as you determined that they are permanent losses and let the profitable side run for a longer time to generate more profit to cover the losses to net you some profit over time. If you vary the position size between the two, then it would depend. If you happen to be profitable on the side with the larger position size, then your profit will be higher than the losses but then once you are making losses, your losses with the larger position size will also be larger and basically canceling out the profit that was made before since you would have no way of knowing beforehand whether you will be making a profit or not with your either side for you to change position sizes so at the end, your net profit/loss would still be zero or very close to it.

And btw there are no dumb questions. If somebody tells you your questions are dumb, it's because they are dumb themselves.

mervyn · Jul 18, 2023

ETJ said:
In the US it's a fool's errand from both a tax and profitability standpoint. Civil fraud and potentially criminal fraud. The laws in your home country may be different.

There are dozens of threads discussing it.

it is food's errand to go after you, 1 es and 10 mes are the same, 1 tick difference in entry price can also be managed. the strategy works more often than not in swing trades.

murray t turtle · Jul 18, 2023

mervyn said:
Assuming your accounts are big enough, long trades keep it on with fatter price target, short trades cut losses quickly. Small accounts, net zero intraday.

%%
Good , + may not ''always '' work.
QQQ + QID related may work......... Roth account + back door Roth usually dont pay any taxes.
MAKE sure to note which one trend$ drawdowns/profit$ + which one countertrend$.