Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

JLJ

"Risk No More Than 2-5%"...What Does That Mean?

Recommended Posts

Everyone seems to agree you should not risk more than 2% (absolute 5% max) on a single trade. But what does that mean? Does it mean no more than 2% of your account should be spent on one buy? Or - that you should calculate and set your stop loss relative to the number of shares you buy, so if it goes south the max you can lose is 2%? If the latter, that allows you a much greater position size re: the number of shares you can safely buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Everyone seems to agree you should not risk more than 2% (absolute 5% max) on a single trade.

 

Indeed they do. Also of note is that most lose trying to trade. What does that tell you? Whats magic about 2%?

 

Risk should be defined by your system, your comfort level, your probability of win etc.

 

That figure could be 1%, 0.5%, 10%, maybe 2%.

 

I'd ignore most of what passes for common wisdom in retail trading if I were you and figure out what suits you, not what some failed trader turned author thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like my question was not clear. If my account has $10,000, 2% of that is $200. Let's say I'm looking at a stock that's $50 a share. If I want to risk no more than 2% does that mean I should buy no more than 4 shares? But let's say I set my stop loss at $49.95 (not that I would set it so close, it's just a simple example). Then to guarantee a loss no greater than $200, I could buy 4,000 shares.

Which is right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the second option.

think of it as different questions.

How much am I willing to loose (not necessarily risk) if I buy this and then it goes down and I stop myself out?

2% of the equity or $200.

How many shares then can I buy if my stop is 49.95?

4000 shares.

What then is my total exposure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like my question was not clear. If my account has $10,000, 2% of that is $200. Let's say I'm looking at a stock that's $50 a share. If I want to risk no more than 2% does that mean I should buy no more than 4 shares? But let's say I set my stop loss at $49.95 (not that I would set it so close, it's just a simple example). Then to guarantee a loss no greater than $200, I could buy 4,000 shares.

Which is right?

 

Your 2nd option is correct ASSUMING your stop loss is triggered where you think it will be... in stocks, gaps can crush your stop in a heartbeat.

 

Here's a random example I found from PCLN - let's sat you shorted the close where my arrow is @ 225.39. You place your stop on the high @ 236.88. Theoretical risk is 11.49/sh. The next day opens @ 241.75 = 4.87/sh higher than your stop.

 

So keep that in mind. Your 2nd option is the way I did it while swing trading stocks you just have to realize that your stop can get blown by on gaps.

example.png.e8a2fa44a617c57bda0f2f9ffed1fde5.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As others have mentioned, the figure is not as important as to how the amount you choose makes you feel in your loins. Personally, I trade full time with a 1% risk (as per your second option), as anything over that and I start get itchy, irritable and glued to the screen. That said to me either I need to go to the chemist, or I am trading a risk level my energy levels are not comfortable with.

 

I trade currencies primarily where gaps aren't as common (excluding weekends), but brownsfan019 is something to think about. Larry Williams is a good one to read up on for this kind of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Others have eluded to the key metric which is actually risk of ruin. The 2% is an OK rule of thumb that people advise to prevent a streak of losers from putting you too far underwater. Check out TradersCALM - risk of ruin menu for how and why you might want to know RoR. It varies significantly depending on the characteristics of your approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • How's about other crypto exchanges? Are all they banned in your country or only Binance?
    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.