trading through extreme chaos.
much of my insufferable schtick on here is...
“you can get away with doing very simple things if you pick the right place to do them”
you can also get away with doing very simple things if you pick the right time to do them.
It really helps to treat trading as a business, because the reason businesses earn money is often close to the reason you earn money in trading. In both cases you get paid for 1) being able to do things others can't do or 2) taking on risk others don't want to take on. That's essentially the whole thing.
I had asbestos removed this year, which was my first real contact with that industry. Great example, same two things blocking everyone else from doing the job: you need the infrastructure (certification, skills, expensive equipment, etc.) and even if you had all of that, you still wouldn't *want* to do it, because the work is unpleasant, hard, and the risk of getting it wrong is severe. That gap is the entire business model. The market pays a premium for absorbing a problem the rest want nothing to do with.
Trading pays for exactly that. You get paid for doing the shitty thing, for sitting in positions others won't sit in. So you want to move toward ideas and strategies that have some shittiness to them: uncomfortable, with a clear downside and a specific risk attached.
Some real advice here:
Consider switching from price based trading to thesis based trading. It's very hard to bag a 100x with price based trading because there's most definitely going to be some local vol along the way that will trigger your system to sell.
You hold through those dips when you're holding because of a thesis, not price. You enter a trade when you believe something will happen, you exit when it either fulfills that or fails to do so, that's it, price is not involved.
This style isn't for everyone but I think for the people who can pull it off, it's vastly superior for holding something for real multiples and not "only" a 2-5x
When we place stops we are letting the Exchange, the Brokers, the MM algos, the Invisible Hand know where is our cutoff point.
...and they are coming after 80% of that liquidity.
Would rather assume 80% of the time our entry will be tested into a drawdown where hypothetical stop is probably best place to enter.
But what if it does't? Well one over-simplified approach is to use Pareto principle scaling like open with 20% instead of 100% and still have 80% to avg cost at lower in full or scale in with 3-4 more clips of 20% if criteria is indeed meet to do it or if pending analysis we flip strategy to exit the trade.
If we are in trade that require constant monitor the problem is not the lack of stops... it is the excessive size at risk. (sleeping peacefully is often good measure of this)
The immediate advantage of a drawdown only on the 20% of initial position besides the obvious 1/5 of the loss (relative to 100%) is the fact psychologically it does make it much more easier to take action and not suffer from the Endowment Effect common in trading while holding positions at loss hoping for market recovery because we decided it must happen.
Also there are other approaches that don't need the stop like hedging, delta neutral etc...
This is not to say stops don't have utility on downside protection or more sophisticated multi-directional plays but probably not the way they are taught in the mainstream to use all the time non-stop for all the trades.
In crypto you have 40 psychopaths with billions of dollars trying to take every last penny you own by next tuesday.
In the stock market you have 150 million US residents with an IQ of 100 buying with every single one of their paychecks regardless of price and with no plans to sell in the next decade
@varrock they do to keep their export industry alive/avoid deflation, so much that they had to lower their rates to 0 recently
but yeah no debt and good investements with their money, basically the gold of forex