You should not over react. You are a young man your fatality rate is < .2%. If you don't have any underlying health issues, it is <.02%, about the same as flu. My question for you if you are willing to comment is: Hedging a black swan with say long put is very expensive. I did that in the past and invariably it didn't pay, cut deeply into returns with the hedge. I essentially abandoned the hedge last year and then it hit. So how do you hedge a coronavirus? Thanks.
Big difference between risk aversion and risk management. You are confusing increasing size with double or triple or infinite size! And if you have solid methods and expectancy, why would an incremental increase in sizing need to be "random"? So yes, there is an appropriate time to trade say 12 or 15 micros instead of 1 mini, and to "see what happens". A reminder, the main subject in my post is about decreasing size due to volatility. I am not remotely suggesting to take on more risk than you are comfortable with. I am saying volatility works identically on both the risk, and the reward. If you've determined something like a 1/6 size position can generate your "normal" take, why wouldn't you take advantage and reduce size by ONLY 1/4, 1/3, or even 1/2? Why do you need to reduce to 1/6? Some people strive for "sameness". Others thrive on growth and learning and sometimes overcoming fears.
It feels like 2001 and 2008-2009 all over because of the fear. In scenarios like this you go back to trading only stocks you know well with tons of liquidity and take gains/losses quicker because these computers will whip you faster than any human panic can. There is so little liquidity thanks to Funds having no risk. The NYSE Specialist use to have balls to take on size, now that's gone for now.