trailing stop

[murray t turtle]

Depends on the instrument, volume, and overall type of move. SL can also be Stop Gain. It works best when the gain probability is less than the loss probability, independent of the actual trade PL.

Personally the single "hit a price" exit method is not preferred for me. Rather the SL point is just a data point, not an "submit" exit order point. I prefer to let the "SL point" be hit, and then start the process of exiting based on market action, and PL. When those are satisfied, I will market out of the trade.

%%
YOU ,BB, changed the name LOL=Stop Gain, or Exit Gain[SG or EG]
Good shot- name change or nickname .
A loss[expense] is part of any business + no such thing as any profit business that has no expences.
No such thing also== as a good target shoot with out plenty of ammo[ or arrows] fired
I also like some preplanned exits[aka resting orders] even if a non trailing stop can be an inferior profit.........................................................................................
murray TT

 

[Goldlover]

%%
Trail stops?? Good to excellent in most all cases
[2] SINCE cant predict markets, even with a very good trend;
take some profits sometimes. And never confuse 1st line with last line.
TOO much leverage could easy goof up both winning plans.
I'm not a market maker , dont think they ever trail stops @ making markets anyway?LOL

Your reminder about leverage is important excessive leverage can undermine even the most well-thought-out trading strategies.

 

[TrAndy2022]

Your reminder about leverage is important excessive leverage can undermine even the most well-thought-out trading strategies.

But the excessive leverage you can only get when you are small. When you are much bigger than you do not get those leverage conditions anymore and need to put more money for safety so leverage is much less. Then any good strategy does not have any "too much leverage" problem. So your concern can happen only to the very small trader. For example you get 500:1 leverage on FX if you are small. But when you trade on any bigger FX broker you only get 100:1 leverage or less. It also depends on the area where you live because from USA you only get max. 50:1 leverage. So overleveraging is much less possible then. If you trade FX with a bank you might get 25:1 leverage only. So there is no overleveraging anymore possible on any better strategy.
Same is with trading futures. If you trade intraday futures you might get over 300:1 leverage for the first 100 contracts traded on small futures brokers. But then if you grow and you want to trade 500 or 1000 contracts you get much less leverage because you need to put much more money for any intraday margins.

 

[murray t turtle]

But the excessive leverage you can only get when you are small. When you are much bigger than you do not get those leverage conditions anymore and need to put more money for safety so leverage is much less. Then any good strategy does not have any "too much leverage" problem. So your concern can happen only to the very small fishes.

%%
LOL, its monday for sure, what did you drink sat-sun??.
Ltcm-Long term capital management.............................................................
Actually i liked some of your mid month posts;
but month % ends plenty of days past mid month, every month.

 

[TrAndy2022]

Yeah, but LTCM traded garbage. They compared apples with oranges and worse, so without any brain what is fundamentally really connected or not. That is why they had to fail in the end for sure. If they used less leverage they would loose anyway the same but just bit slowlier. Because a non working and non sound strategy in the end can only produces losses. Those noble prizes winners thought that everything has a strong connection, but this is not the case. My previous post was regarding long term sound and successful strategies regarding how much leverage is obtainable. I would put LTCM strategy in the category as not solid and non working strategy.

 

[murray t turtle]

Yeah, but LTCM traded garbage. They compared apples with oranges and worse, so without any brain what is fundamentally really connected or not. That is why they had to fail in the end for sure. If they used less leverage they would loose anyway the same but just bit slowlier. Because a non working and non sound strategy in the end can only produces losses. Those noble prizes winners thought that everything has a strong connection, but this is not the case. My previous post was regarding long term sound and successful strategies regarding how much leverage is obtainable. I would put LTCM strategy in the category as not solid and non working strategy.

%%
True;
partly, they maybe should have asked the 21 year old bank trainee , think we could get by with super insane leverage on russian evil empire debt?? Thier crooked character maybe ok, since they have questionable collateral,, but maybe ok capacity to pay??
BUT I'm glad i looked @ that LTCM trainwreck again; I wrongly guessed the approximate russian debt %=not even close. It was less than i guessed
Looks like Goldlover noticed something you did not. Warren Buffet also, on another LTCM problem .
So your last line maybe right;
but Warren Buffet noted ego risk +pride risk, worse than any leverage risk- which your ego goofed up in your first post.
One of the few disadvantages of being a man =ego risk 3:07 CST RMH closed