OMG I can't believe this fallacy still exists in trading!

Discussion in 'Trading' started by wxytrader, Oct 14, 2023.

  1. Thank you! tomkat22 gets it!
     
    #81     Oct 15, 2023
  2. destriero

    destriero


    Your net liq drops 50% and you need a double to recover... but you're trading on half the cash. Assuming that you're applying the same methodology your size has to double to achieve the same notional win and you're now risking 2X. Is this thread meant as satire?

    So you take a 50% haircut and risk the same units?

    LTCM tried to raise capital when they were down 50%. How did that work out for them? (They went debit).
     
    #82     Oct 15, 2023
    SunTrader and rb7 like this.
  3. The traders fallacy isn't about recovering from a portfolio loss. It is about wrongly applying probabilities to a stocks price movement based on how much the stock price has declined. The two things are completely irrelevant.
     
    #83     Oct 15, 2023
  4. destriero

    destriero


    No it doesn't. It's the same thing...portfolio goes down...portfolio goes up.
     
    #84     Oct 15, 2023
  5. Yes but the portfolio goes up and down based on the stock price. The stock price does not go up and down based on the portfolio.

    If a stock drops from $10 to $5. Is there less of a probability of it returning to $10 than there was for it to drop to $5?
     
    #85     Oct 15, 2023
  6. taowave

    taowave

    The real traders fallacy is referencing Investopedia...

    You are the only one talking "price action" after a 50% drawdown....

    What you are missing ,as you just started trading ,is when you are down 50%,you are most likely toes up

     
    #86     Oct 15, 2023
  7. Just started trading? lol who has a Lambo?
    We aren't talking about a portfolio being down 50% and how much percent is needed to recover...we are talking about the price of a stock being down 50% and the probabilities of it returning a previous level.

    Again. If a stock drops from $10 to $5 there is no mathematical burden preventing the stock from rising to $10 again.
     
    #87     Oct 15, 2023
  8. taowave

    taowave

    same guy with the 2 inch pecker???? :)


     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2023
    #88     Oct 15, 2023
    wxytrader likes this.
  9. SunTrader

    SunTrader

    What is so hard about you (and it seems a few other lost souls) understanding this - that I previously posted?

    "But simple math aggggggggggggain tells you a stock that drops from $2 to $1, needs a 100% move to make it back to $2. With me so far? :confused: Another stock that drops from $200 to $100 needs the same 100% move to make it back to original price $200

    Which has a greater probability of happening? Especially in a timely manner - like oh within a calendar year. Repeat, greater probability."

    Both need a 100% move but which is more likely to actually happen?
     
    #89     Oct 15, 2023
  10. What you are describing is what external factors would affect the price action of each stock, and what is the probability of those external factors resulting in the price recovering. Well that would depend entirely on the external factors.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2023
    #90     Oct 15, 2023