Quote from larrybf:
THUNDERDOG.... thanks again for the feedback. much appreciated... please explain one more thing....i am one of those traders who uses 2% as my stop out risk. i thought i was being conservative.... you obviously feel otherwise... i am not a hyperactive scalper so using tiny stops and targets just willnot feed me enough.. BUT if i am playing with fire.... please enlighten me..... thanks.....by the way i have never blown out an account so maybe that is the reason for my boldness/stupidity....
Hi again Larry,
There is no pat answer to your question. You will likely get as many different answers as the number of people who respond to your question.
In my case, I trade only the Mini S&P on an intraday basis, and I get a number of setups each day. I risk considerably less than 1% of my trading capital on each trade as measured by the size of the initial protective stop. Some years ago, I position traded a number of markets and risked closer to 2% per trade. I personally found it to be a bit on the high side. Some people risk more, while others risk less. I also recall when I first started to day trade the large S&P index in December of 1999. Although I had fewer setups than I presently have, for a brief and painful period, I actually risked about 2% per trade. I could not handle it. (Of course, it did not help that my method was not nearly as good as I thought it was.)
Larry, I realize that this does not help much. So here is what I suggest you consider doing to get an idea of how much you should risk per trade. You mentioned in an earlier post to this thread that you have one setup per day and that you have done well with your method this year. Assuming you have recorded your trades, look at the the general reliability of your method as measured by % wins vs. % losses, and the size of the average win as compared to the size of the average loss. These numbers are a starting point and are not set in stone, because they only describe the past. They will not predict your method's future. (Remember the comments in my prior post regarding probability vs. uncertainty.) Determine the maximum drawdown of your method in the past and the maximum number of consecutive losing trades. Going forward, assume it will be at least twice as bad. Having done that, try to come to terms with how much drawdown you can survive and are prepared to tolerate. This exercise should help you tentatively arrive at a reasonable risk size per trade. Essentially, the idea is to arrive at the maximum amount or percentage that you would comfortably be prepared to risk per trade going forward, based on your historic testing or actual results, and then risk LESS than that amount.
If you had the luxury of being able to assume that future performance would essentially equal past results, then you would not need this buffer. But you cannot realistically make this assumption, therefore, you must buffer against the uncertainty in order to survive. If you do not use such a buffer, you will almost certainly stub your toe in a bad way, falling over the inconveniently (and unexpectedly) fat tail of the distribution curve.
Again, this is just my opinion. Perhaps I am being overly conservative. However, I think most folks would agree that if you take care of the downside, the upside will take care of itself. Good luck.
Regards,
Thunderdog