I can't really answer (sorry!) because I feel it depends so much more on the type of trading you're doing than on the instrument. In case that comes across as a bit of a "cop-out", I'll mention roughly how I trade NQ, myself, though I don't know whether it's appropriate/relevant to you ... I trade it from constant-volume bars (i.e. rather than timed bars), and put my initial stop-loss just above/under the most recently formed swing-high/low (depending on whether it's a long or a short trade). Regarding targets, depending on the entry-type (i.e. which set-up it is: I trade 5 different set-ups, all by price action and without indicators, though 3 of the 5 are pretty similar), I close either one third or two thirds of my contracts/lots (at two different targets) determined by both current volatility and any S/R lines on my chart and try to let the last part "run" (if it will). I never use automated trailing stops and don't believe in them as anything more than a "third-best compromise". I often trail my stop-loss manually on the last part of the trade, again just above/below the most recently formed swing-high/low. I eventually close trades that do manage to run a bit according to a little set of established price action patterns (e.g. I'll close in congestion, bearing in mind that I can always re-enter, etc.). My initial target (where there are two) is often less than the distance between the stop-loss and the entry (i.e. the first third of the trade has an R:R ratio of less than 1.0 ... many people would dislike this, but it suits me because I'm very risk-averse and need a high win-rate, or at least partial win-rate, because I can't and won't tolerate drawdowns that many other traders - especially those posting in forums, apparently - would find relatively acceptable). If that all sounds a bit "mysterious" or "complicated", I should perhaps mention that, broadly speaking, I'm trading "patterns like Ross hooks" (nearly always with the trend, though I do also trade occasional, prominent 1-2-3 formations, which are of course reversals), and that my trade-duration can be anything from 5 minutes to 5 hours but that the latter is terribly rare and the average is much closer to the former. I take about 6-7 trades per day, on average, and that average is gradually creeping upwards, over the years. (I trade CL as well as NQ.) I trade about 99% by TA and only 1% by fundamentals; all my trading is S/R-based; I don't use indicators (other than occasionally looking at an ATR to form a quick impression of current volatility). Whether any of that "information" is actually helpful to anyone else is another matter, I'm afraid.
Not automated, no: I have absolutely no interest at all in automation. I've backtested and forward tested extensively, and have been trading for nearly a decade, and doing more or less what I'm doing now for more than (the most recent) half of that time. As mentioned above, the great majority of my entries are trend-following (basically, I'm using price action parameters to identify potential long entries in uptrends and short entries in downtrends, trying in essence to "buy the dips in uptrends and sell the rallies in downtrends", to time my entries as well as I conveniently can) but firstly they're small, intraday trends, and secondly I do also trade one reversal pattern, when it arises, so it's not quite exclusively trend-following. Whether it's actually a "system" at all, collectively, is of course a more subjective question. It could be seen as one, in a sense, in that almost all its independent, constituent parts are substantially rule-driven. It could also be seen as discretionary, in that it's almost entirely price-action-based and dependent on extensive experience and practice. I'm not "anti-indicator" but - like several other traders I know - became successful, myself, only after abandoning them and relying on my assessments of the non-indicator-based parts of TA. I've "cobbled together" the way I trade using what I learned mostly from the textbooks of Joe Ross, Bob Volman and Al Brooks, without whose inputs I probably wouldn't be making a living at all. But I use them on NQ and CL with constant-volume bars. (Of course I'm not trying to suggest that price-action-based parameters are necessarily non-automatable: I'm suggesting - in fact "stating" - only that they're non-automatable by me.)
You're not a rookie, but three weeks ago you thought ES closed at 1:15 PM on Fridays. I saw your post before you deleted it.
I wouldn't criticise him too much for that: I know plenty of professional, institutional traders who either think the same or act like they do. Who'd want to trade S&P futures on a Friday afternoon?
NQ is the bomb. Best contract in the US Market right now. It's not hard to trade it well. It's hard to share how easy it is to trade. As NoDoji so aptly proved over her years here: "No good deed goes unpunished". The greatest gift you can give YOURSELF, once you find your way in the markets and it all just becomes no struggle at all to where you actually feel guilt for making so much in so little time, is to trade anonymously from your home and go about your life with no one else around you having a clue about your success.
Thank you everyone for the input. I'm going to start first in simulation mode with a stop limit of five points or a target of 10. I back tested as many days as I could and that seem to work pretty well. I'll 2 to 1 on NQ versus risking two to make three on ES
Hey Steve and Xela.... I have looked at charts and it appears that there is not the 2 hour crappy zone from approx 11:30 CST till 13:30 CST for the NQ that we absolutely have for the ES... Do you agree?