If I remember correctly, about 40-45% of the trading days in a year start at or near day's low/high and close at or near day's high/low respectively.
This means, if your system can reasonably get the direction right, a fixed stop loss system will end up making you the most.
This is applicable for intraday trend following systems. For trailing stop losses to work really well, you need a much bigger room, and that has to be driven by volatility of the instrument you trade.
No matter what you trade, TEST the SL methods before implementing.
This was the thread I made in June regarding the aforementioned behavior of Nifty (and BN too).
Different kind of systems you can build for trading & investing - a broad categorization:
1. Market Neutral:
Ex: Finding overvalued and undervalued securities, shorting the overvalued ones, and buying the undervalued ones. The idea is to create a portfolio of zero beta.
This way, you operate independent of market risk, and profit from the movement of individual securities.
2. Fundamental Growth:
Fundamentally identifying companies that are expected to grow and appreciate capital. You go long with these securities.
3. Fundamental Value:
Using fundamental analysis to go long in undervalued (and sometimes even deep value distressed securities).
4. Quantitative directional:
Using quantitative analysis to identify overvalued/undervalued companies, going long on latter, short on former.
Journaling is a very important thing to do if you're a trader. It serves the following purposes:
- Helps identify patterns in your trading behavior
- Helps identify high-impact mistakes to fix
- Helps to understand where you're losing most money
- Helps in refining your edge.
Journaling your way to success isn't a new concept. It's been done for years now and has been practiced and advised by many millionaires, billionaires too.
Different kinds of journaling serve different purposes. There are two major ones that I follow I'd like to suggest here.
The first one is the one that I learnt from @GrantCardone.
Just before going to bed, and immediately after waking up - write down 10-15 things that you want to have achieved for yourself and your life in the future.
Write them in the present tense as if you already have them.
Apple is by now only milking whatever brand value they have left, from their customers, with only superior OS experience.
This is moat of the biggest form. Apple spends 120-150$ on iPhone cost. Makes 3-4x in profits. They keep raising prices and dropping parts to reduce their cost and maximize profit in the name of "reducing environmental impact".
And no matter what kind of shenanigans Apple pulls, their loyal braindead fanbase is going to buy their gadgets coz you only show iPhone as status symbol, not a OnePlus or a Samsung or a Pixel.
Of the fifty most important stocks on the NYSE in 1911, today only one, General Electric, remains in business. That’s how powerful the forces of competitive destruction are.
Over the very long term, history shows that the chances of any business surviving in a manner agreeable to a company’s owners are slim at best.
There is no such thing as a permanent moat.
Even such invincible businesses today like eBay, Google, Microsoft, Toyota, and American Express will all eventually decline and disappear.
This is going to be a thread about **Moat** and **Competitive Advantage**.
1. Capitalists seek the highest returns possible. For any possible investment, you need to maximize the return on investment while minimizing the risk involved. The sweet spot is what you strive to get.
2. You run a business to make the highest profits that you possibly can. If you're smart, you won't start or invest in airlines.
3. Most businesses that see highest returns on capital will attract competition. When competition comes in, return on capital decreases.
4. Very few companies beat the odds, defy economic gravity. Competition destroys excess returns.
5. MOAT comprises of structural and sustainable qualities that are inherent to the business. Moat isn't a hot product, not a cool piece of tech, not the biggest market share.
Being a toxic critic is very easy. Doesn't take much effort. But, being a helpful critic is difficult.
A helpful critic:
- Points out flaws in your arguments
- Respectfully disagrees
- Puts forth his/her side of the argument neatly
- Adds value to the argument with expertise
It's easy to criticise from the sidelines that someone is wrong or that something is stupid.
It's 10x easier doing that anonymously.
It's 100x easier being a troll.
There's no skin in the game.
For ex: If you have expertise in a subject, and you find someone make mistakes in what they share in your line of expertise, if you only troll that person - you're a toxic critic. If you hop on and help them improve what they share, or add to the discussion, you're a helpful one.