Pat Riley
Established member
- Messages
- 794
- Likes
- 178
Ooh, this one concerns me, and gives me pause for thought, Pat.
What about trades where a breakout of resistance (say) may turn into the start of a decent trend? This is the kind of trade I regularly go into without a specific exit in mind (trailing my stop-loss often).
Is that "going into a trade without seeing an exit" or is trailing one's stop-loss manually under the swing-lows "seeing an exit" in the sense that one knows that eventually either it will be hit, or one will "close in congestion" or whenever else one decides that one's reason for being in the trade is no longer valid?
It strikes me that with many trend-following methods, overall, the bulk of the profits inevitably come from a pretty small proportion of the trades, and these may be exactly the kind of trades one has actually gone into without really "seeing an exit" when one enters?
The thing is me dear Alexa, I wasn’t even thinking of trading when I came out with the one. It related to a scrape I got meself into on Mexico City. But isn’t it sometimes the way that something said in jest turns out to be worth a more serious consideration.
Yer explanation is a model of sense and more than a few traders will benefit from from lookin at what you have written and utilising it. Using price action to dictate yer exit is obviously extremely sound. Having taken the effort to come up with something rather useful yourself in this far from useful thread is why I gave this issue some further thought meself as even though not initially posted with respect to trading, it turns out it does represent me own approach - to only go in when I have an exit clearly available. Or more specifically, to not end up with any net exposure.
Without going inta a detailed explanation of me methods and risk havin ya all nod off, me bread and butter trades involves takin typically long dated stuff in usually highly illiquid markets off the hands of people increasingly uncomfortable with their situation– and putting what they now consider unwanted exposure into the hands of others who feel such a holding brings them more comfort than not holding it. They both can then begin to experience the joy of not owning/owning products for which the variables involved in pricing them makes my work a true model of the utilisation of edge through the mis-matched assessments of perceived risk. The beauty of it is that I don’t have to have a better model or a firmer grasp on actual risk – I just have ta know two people who are widely enough differing in view as to perceptions of risk to make it worth me while. They both end up happy bunnies and is often the case in these things, immediately and completely forget the deal the moment it is done without ever further considerin their actions or the result or the alternative futures that could have developed had they not done that deal, they’re too busy with the next one. I take a small consideration for me service in this respect. Now it’s often, though not always, the way that size is critical for the seller/buyer– they want all their position covered, or as much as they can afford and I can’t always get a direct match on size. As I obviously don’t want to be holding anything meself, I’ll need to pay a premium to unload any net risk through any number of means and providing that cost is the tiniest fraction of me profit – I’ll do the deal – but only if I know I can get all the legs on at the same time i.e. an exit. If I can’t get all that in place, I don’t go in. If I can’t be immediately out the moment I’m in, I’m not interested.