I close them at the 0% line. I find that overall, this about evens it out. If I were to leave a "runner" or whatever, sometimes it would go up and sometimes it would go down, so whatever, it all evens out by closing everything at 0%. Scaling in is superior for people who can't predict price direction (which is me) and who are trading strategies that lend themselves to scaling. If I could predict price movement, I would go all in with my entire position right away. For this strategy, there's no sense in going all in right away, because then if price falls from the first retracement to the bottom, I lose a ton of money. Scaling in lowers my maximum total loss in this way. And remember, I don't claim to know when or where price is going to finally reverse so I have to scale in.
And why is that interesting? In statistics, an "example" is even less useless than nothing. You are clinging to numbers as if they have some significance. Have you done your OWN study, with perhaps 1,000 Fib numbers and 1,000 random numbers, and shown that X minutes later, that the market does something more interesting when Fib nubmers occur? "No?" That is what I thought. That is basically what studies have done, and they have debunked Fib numbers. Fib numbers are nothing more than your belief that you picked up from someone else, and you have convinced yourself that they are therefore interesting. That is the point of things like backtesting and walk-forward testing. You prove something gives an edge. If you do not do this and continue thowing up cherry picked examples, then you are little more than a newbie paper trader.
You cant really make those assessments with some sort of a backtest... Whether you know it or not,you are simply advocating scaling in vs a single entry. With that said,I am not saying you are not profitable,but I do think your logic is flawed.The good news is that the market is efficient and either method will most likely yield similar results.. IMHO,its clear that scaling in gives you an "emotional comfort level"...
No, you don't seem to understand that they can be used as a tool in conjunction with other other price analysis and money management including scaling in and out to create an edge. Examples are being given to show that this worked in the past. None of us claim it works 100%, what we are saying is that we have the ability to have a win% greater than 50% that allows us to make money. Also as mentioned before, it does not matter if its based on real science or not. If a hedge fund buys at a fib level with enough force to move the market, then that fib level worked because the hedge fund trader believed in the fib level. In playing poker, a 10 and 2 is bad hand and normally should be thrown away. Statistically its a bad hand. However, if you are Doyle and professional, you know how to make this hand into a winner. A professional trader can make money with fibs when others will lose money using them.
you're btw, the generally accepted manner of disproving someone is to logically construct an argument that doesn't contain any fallacies (lest you lose credibility) which disproves their argument. Shrugging it off with a joke is commonly done by scam artists and "gurus" (reference that "how to be a guru" thread I linked to you). By failing to disprove him, you are not helping your case that his claim is untrue. So, try again, I guess.
Fibs are random. That is the point of institutional studies. They test things like TA, fib, and many other methods people cling to. If they show no value, then they are useless for all. If something does not work, then it is garbage. Combining it with other garbage only yields garbage. It is never the mark of a professional. I have never seen a serious large hedge fund/investment bank/bank/large insurance company/other financial institutions place ANY stock in things like Fib. Such institutions only use things that they can show add value from an edge, cost, diversification, hedge, risk reduction or other financial aspect. Employees/Traders who held to things like that would be sent out the door if they started talking about the useless.
traderzones if funny cause examples on charts of fibs working are being shown here and he just refuses to see it. even the examples of OP are showing fibs being used as a tool to make profitable trades. he is either too retarded to learn how to work a useable tool or just too damn lazy to try or just purely turned off by fibs. whatever the reason no one can take off his blinkers for him only he can do so for himself. and this is the funny part; if fibonacci showed him his middle finger he would claim that he did not see it just as he is not seeing fibs working on charts being shown on this thread lmao is he a naysayer or just in denial? or a combo of both
is this your own research? if it is good for you; one less tool for u to use. if you are believing in someone else's research then sorry that does not count cause that means you are just agreeing with the researcher and dont actually know the facts yourself
Very nice. The funny part is that plenty on here haven't a clue of the significance of what you posted. That's a shame. Unfortunately the OP has his head up his ass and doesn't understand most fib traders don't trade fib numbers naked.