Why do you limit the maximum drawdown on the account? - page 16
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Dima, I was thinking about what the lock gives us, the lock gives us the right to choose the time of closing the trade, let's say we have a loss locked in, we can choose the time of this loss, as well as the time of profit. I think this is the sacred meaning, although now they will probably say it's nonsense again and wag their eyes.
It's not "timing," it's... the timing of the balance sheet.
You think I don't know what's going on... It doesn't take a lot of brains to put it on the balance sheet. For some reason, I think I'd drop any brokerage house by my actions.
What do you mean, drop it? What do you mean, drop it?
yeah .. .that' s the dumbest reasoningI've ever seen:) except for the Coon from the alps... - that's the way to the bottom... and only an idiot does not see it(realize it)...
really... they don't belong in forex...
dear moderators, will this aggressive demoman ever get a say in this?
In other words, the reversal of margin must be taken into account. In short, with differently directed and with any simultaneous (I mean acting at the same time) transactions are averaging in relation to the deposit, the average position. I.e. the position averaging occurs ALWAYS when one more position is added (by time)
Imagine that you have two independent accounts and the locking will be done by opening different positions in different accounts. Naturally, they will say now, what difference does it make, the position will be free to walk on each account, and the kolyan may come earlier on one of the accounts, of course, yes, if you look at things primitively. And here, when you have TS, or rather MM is calculated directly on the margin, on funds that can be entered into the trade, it is a little different. You can choose (within certain limits of course) the point of convergence between lock positions. for the overall balance sheet.
I've read the whole thread and get a strange impression.
Virtually no one mentions time (in any form) in their reasoning about max drawdown. It's like predicting that the price will pass X number of points in the right direction, who knows when, but it will pass. It's pernicious logic from the habit of placing fixed stops. There is nothing else in the world but price, no volume, no time and basta )
Especially for sever32.
The main goal of investors is to multiply the funds invested. At the maximum drawdown of 100% it does not matter what the profitability of the trader, because in the long run 1000% + 1000% - 100% = -100%. Thus, at the maximum drawdown of 100% becomes impossible to plan investments and the only way of investing becomes a game of chance: either completely lose the initial bet or increase the bet by n times and immediately withdraw the money. Investors with small deposits are more interested in preserving future substantial profits, which are many times higher than their initial stake. And this can only be done by limiting the risk within reasonable limits. In other words, the problem for them is not to lose the initial deposit but to preserve the future potential profit. Big money is more conservative and focused on long-term work. They cannot afford the strategy of make a bet, take a profit and go home. They are forced to invest always and everywhere, and doing so without investment planning is also impossible.
You need a looped system of independent accounts, each connected to a common pool of capital. It should be possible to keep the balance ring of accounts within certain limits, and the surplus should be thrown into the reservoir, and sometimes the surplus should be taken from the reservoir when there is not enough for the balance of the ring.
This way, the consequences of events that have already happened can be used/turned to one side or the other.
By creating a common reservoir waviness through the ring, whether it is a rising waviness, a falling waviness or a lateral waviness, you can use elementary MM to bring this waviness into growth,
adding to the total lotta on the rising sections and reducing on the falling sections. I do not know if the multicurrency ring can be used, or rather if this principle of independent margin can be used on the multicurrency ring. Without creating several accounts or not.
Another option is to create accounts in separate currencies. Each account has its own depo currency. I am getting ahead of myself.
Especially for sever32.
The main goal of investors is to multiply the funds invested. At the maximum drawdown of 100% it does not matter what the profitability of the trader, because in the long run 1000% + 1000% - 100% = -100%. Thus, at the maximum drawdown of 100% investment planning becomes impossible and the only way of investing becomes a game of chance: either completely lose the initial bet or increase the bet by n times and immediately withdraw money.
and the intermediate withdrawal is kind of a no-no? Who forces the investor to reinvest until the end?
Especially for sever32.
The main goal of investors is to multiply the funds invested. At the maximum drawdown of 100% it does not matter what the profitability of the trader, because in the long run 1000% + 1000% - 100% = -100%. Thus, at the maximum drawdown of 100% becomes impossible to plan investments and the only way of investing becomes a game of chance: either completely lose the initial bet or increase the bet by n times and immediately withdraw the money. Investors with small deposits are more interested in preserving future substantial profits, which are many times higher than their initial stake. And this can only be done by limiting the risk within reasonable limits. In other words, the problem for them is not to lose the initial deposit but to preserve the future potential profit. Big money is more conservative and focused on long-term work. They cannot afford the strategy of make a bet, take a profit and go home. They are forced to invest always and everywhere, and doing so without investment planning is also impossible.
I'm not an economist, I don't do a lot of things. But still I think I'm thinking from a common sense point of view)
I come to a BCS office a couple of months ago, they accept me as a potential investor, first of all I answer that I have the possibility to allocate 1 mn RUB for investments. Among other things they offer me a strategy to manage my assets with expected profit of 100% p.a. and a risk of 50% of investment.
According to you, I should invest the entire amount because it is a lot of money (for me); investment planning; preserving future substantial profits, etc. etc. In my opinion, it is right to invest 500tp and offer a return of 200% with a risk of 100%.
In this case, you have operational space and the ability to dispose of the remaining amount, which you can multiply or spend on something substantial and useful at a given time, rather than keep, in fact ballast, in an investment account.
Or I am a trader and explain in short the essence of my system, which is not worse than others, but with a theoretical, possible 100% profitability. At the same time I explain the main trading principle where I use all assets of my deposit and open a deal with a volume that characterizes the current state and the market and the risk of it in case of wrong market estimation. To diversify risks within one account I open, for instance, 10 deals with 10% risk of the deposited funds each. Explaining that the probability of error in 10 consecutive trades is almost impossible, moreover, TP is several times bigger than SL, which means that even a numerical preponderance of losing trades will not affect the final result.
But I don't find the investors' understanding that I work with the whole depo and there is a risk, respectively, of the whole depo.