Successful traders: Risk Taker or Risk Averse? - Psychology and Money Management | futures io social day trading
futures io futures trading


Successful traders: Risk Taker or Risk Averse?
Updated: Views / Replies:5,642 / 42
Created: by Big Mike Attachments:2

Welcome to futures io.

(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)

futures io is the largest futures trading community on the planet, with over 90,000 members. At futures io, our goal has always been and always will be to create a friendly, positive, forward-thinking community where members can openly share and discuss everything the world of trading has to offer. The community is one of the friendliest you will find on any subject, with members going out of their way to help others. Some of the primary differences between futures io and other trading sites revolve around the standards of our community. Those standards include a code of conduct for our members, as well as extremely high standards that govern which partners we do business with, and which products or services we recommend to our members.

At futures io, our focus is on quality education. No hype, gimmicks, or secret sauce. The truth is: trading is hard. To succeed, you need to surround yourself with the right support system, educational content, and trading mentors Ė all of which you can find on futures io, utilizing our social trading environment.

With futures io, you can find honest trading reviews on brokers, trading rooms, indicator packages, trading strategies, and much more. Our trading review process is highly moderated to ensure that only genuine users are allowed, so you donít need to worry about fake reviews.

We are fundamentally different than most other trading sites:
  • We are here to help. Just let us know what you need.
  • We work extremely hard to keep things positive in our community.
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts.
  • We firmly believe in and encourage sharing. The holy grail is within you, we can help you find it.
  • We expect our members to participate and become a part of the community. Help yourself by helping others.

You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community.  It's free and simple.

-- Big Mike, Site Administrator

Reply
 2  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 

Successful traders: Risk Taker or Risk Averse?

  #11 (permalink)
Elite Member
Manchester, NH
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: thinkorswim
Broker/Data: TD Ameritrade
Favorite Futures: Stocks
 
Posts: 902 since Jul 2012
Thanks: 603 given, 1,785 received

I fell off the fiscal cliff.


Last edited by artemiso; February 22nd, 2013 at 02:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to artemiso for this post:
 
  #12 (permalink)
Elite Member
Birmingham UK
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker/Data: IG/eSignal
Favorite Futures: Dax
 
ratfink's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,340 since Dec 2012
Thanks: 11,282 given, 7,092 received


Fat Tails View Post
@artemiso: Fixed-fractional betting is a way to maximize the growth of your account. Let us assume that you have put some capital aside, which you want to use as a stake to engage in favourable bets.

Would you take this bet, which is based on a simple Bernoulli distribution?

-> With a probability of 1/3 you will obtain a return of + 50% on your capital invested
-> With a probability of 2/3 you will make a loss of - 20% on your capital invested

Never. After 2 losers you are down to 64% of capital. 1 winner can only get you back to 96%. Its a losing system in the long haul. Long drawdowns give even more dramatic destruction.

Travel Well
Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to ratfink for this post:
 
  #13 (permalink)
Elite Member
Manchester, NH
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: thinkorswim
Broker/Data: TD Ameritrade
Favorite Futures: Stocks
 
Posts: 902 since Jul 2012
Thanks: 603 given, 1,785 received



ratfink View Post
Never. After 2 losers you are down to 64% of capital. 1 winner can only get you back to 96%. Its a losing system in the long haul. Long drawdowns give even more dramatic destruction.

@ratfink

I think he means 50% of your 'capital invested'. Capital invested could be something like 2% of your total account equity. So in fact, this is a free lunch opportunity if you could trade it forever. If this is hard to imagine just mathematically, you can just see the Monte Carlo simulations that I generated and nearly all of the equity curves end up in the positive after 1000 bets.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to artemiso for this post:
 
  #14 (permalink)
Elite Member
Birmingham UK
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker/Data: IG/eSignal
Favorite Futures: Dax
 
ratfink's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,340 since Dec 2012
Thanks: 11,282 given, 7,092 received


artemiso View Post
@ratfink

I think he means 50% of your 'capital invested'. Capital invested could be something like 2% of your total account equity. So in fact, this is a free lunch opportunity if you could trade it forever. If this is hard to imagine just mathematically, you can just see the Monte Carlo simulations that I generated and nearly all of the equity curves end up in the positive after 1000 bets.

Interesting. If rather puzzling. I remain suspicious for now but defer to greater experience of these things.

(Had 'F' in Maths as part of the Electronics degree. So switched to Psychology and Philosophy. They don't help either. )

Travel Well
Reply With Quote
 
  #15 (permalink)
Elite Member
Israel
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker/Data: pfg
Favorite Futures: eminis
 
Posts: 323 since Jun 2009
Thanks: 6 given, 206 received

Mike,
I don't think that you meant it, but people can be divided into 3 groups:
1. Risk takers - will take a bet even when the odds are against them. less then 50% with 1:1 risk reward
2. Risk indifferent - will take a bet even when the odds are equal.
3. Risk avert - will take a bet only when the odds are on their side.

Only the third group can succeed in trading.

Baruch

Reply With Quote
 
  #16 (permalink)
Elite Member
Greensboro NC
 
Futures Experience: None
Platform: TOS/ NT Dorman
Favorite Futures: ES TF CL
 
Rad4633's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,352 since Sep 2011
Thanks: 2,651 given, 886 received

Im glad you guys are involved in this thread..... i shall watch and see what matures from this discussion

Risk vs reward Imo is the wrong approach because algos could/are physiological programmed, remember retail doesnt matter big fish eat small fish too.

probabilities of success is all that matters

@Big Mike to answer your question i trade both ways you mentioned. We are programmed the same to take the same bet/bait/trade even when its the wrong one, so then probabilities come in to play with ones system. I am no longer discretionary with my setup

Reply With Quote
 
  #17 (permalink)
Elite Member
Georgia, US
 
Futures Experience: None
Platform: Various
Favorite Futures: Various
 
josh's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,897 since Jan 2011
Thanks: 5,143 given, 11,242 received


baruchs View Post
3. Risk avert - will take a bet only when the odds are on their side.

This is now how I (or anyone I think) defines risk aversion--it is defined as preferring lower risk. It does not say anything about probability of winning, thus odds; it only speaks of losing (hence, risk).

So for example, a risk averse person might choose to put his money in bonds, even if he receives sound investment advice that he is 80% certain to double his money this year in equities, because even with an 80% win probability (as far as he can quantify), the 20% chance of losing scares him enough to take the less risky bond route, despite the maybe 10:1 payout prospects in equities versus bonds.


Last edited by josh; February 21st, 2013 at 05:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
 
  #18 (permalink)
Elite Member
Berlin, Europe
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: NinjaTrader, MultiCharts
Broker/Data: Interactive Brokers
Favorite Futures: Keyboard
 
Fat Tails's Avatar
 
Posts: 9,653 since Mar 2010
Thanks: 4,226 given, 25,602 received
Forum Reputation: Legendary


artemiso View Post
@Fat Tails

I don't know about fixed-fractional betting. Do you mean Kelly betting or literally fixed-fractional (e.g. '2% per trade')? I've used neither, but sure, I'll like to hear what you have to say about its advantage.

Yes, I would take the bet under those conditions (infinite capital so decentralized and independent from the rest of the portfolio) because it is free lunch.


@artemiso: I had asked this question because there is a catch. It is not a free lunch, but just another road to disaster. The problem lies in adjusting your bet size to the size of your account. I will try to explain, why the scenario

ROC of 50 % with a probability of 1/3
ROC of - 20% with a probability of 2/3

will deplete your account in the longer run.

The main problem lies in adjusting the investment (or bet size) to the size of your account. If your stake is $ 100.000 then your investment and your returns are smaller than if your stake is $ 200.000.

Fixed fractional betting means that you need to adjust the size of the bet to the size of your account. This will basically maintain your proportianal risk of ruin at a constant level. It also means that you do not

- increase leverage after a loss
- decrease leverage after a win

but that you always put the same fraction of your account at risk. In the scenario above the amount put at risk is 20% of the initial capital.

Now let us assume that you make 6 consecutive bets, with 2 winning trades of +50% and 4 losing trades of - 20%. This is in line with the expected returns. If your initial capital was $ 100.000, your account will show

$ 100.000 * 1.5 * 1.5 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 = $ 92.160

Would you really call this a free lunch? It is one of the safest methods to go deplete your account. After 50 trades you will have lost half your capital, which is the widely accepted equivalent to ruin.

This is not a theoretical case. The above approach describes the problem of leveraged exchange traded funds. As an example let us assume that you had invested $ 100,000 on January 1st, half of the amount in the ProShares Ultra S&P 500 (2x long, symbol SSO) and half of the amount in the ProShares UltraShort S&P 500 (2x short, symbol SDS).

SSO: Open 2008/01/01 83.70 -> Close 2013/ 02/20 67.79
SDS: Open 2008/01/01 185.77 -> Close 2013/02/20 47.75

After 5 years your initial stake would have decreased from $ 100,000 to $ 53,347, which is close to ruin. This shows the detrimental impact of volatility on returns, which is reinforced by the daily rebalancing of the funds. You don't have a risk neutral investment, if you put half of your money in a leveraged long ETF and the other half in a leveraged short ETF.

I think that understanding risk has more to do with mathematics than with psychology.

Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).

Reply With Quote
The following 5 users say Thank You to Fat Tails for this post:
 
  #19 (permalink)
Elite Member
Manchester, NH
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: thinkorswim
Broker/Data: TD Ameritrade
Favorite Futures: Stocks
 
Posts: 902 since Jul 2012
Thanks: 603 given, 1,785 received


Fat Tails View Post
@artemiso: I had asked this question because there is a catch. It is not a free lunch, but just another road to disaster. The problem lies in adjusting your bet size to the size of your account. I will try to explain, why the scenario

ROC of 50 % with a probability of 1/3
ROC of - 20% with a probability of 2/3

will deplete your account in the longer run.

The main problem lies in adjusting the investment (or bet size) to the size of your account. If your stake is $ 100.000 then your investment and your returns are smaller than if your stake is $ 200.000.

Fixed fractional betting means that you need to adjust the size of the bet to the size of your account. This will basically maintain your proportianal risk of ruin at a constant level. It also means that you do not

- increase leverage after a loss
- decrease leverage after a win

but that you always put the same fraction of your account at risk. In the scenario above the amount put at risk is 20% of the initial capital.

Now let us assume that you make 6 consecutive bets, with 2 winning trades of +50% and 4 losing trades of - 20%. This is in line with the expected returns. If your initial capital was $ 100.000, your account will show

$ 100.000 * 1.5 * 1.5 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 = $ 92.160

Would you really call this a free lunch? It is one of the safest methods to go deplete your account. After 50 trades you will have lost half your capital, which is the widely accepted equivalent to ruin.

This is not a theoretical case. The above approach describes the problem of leveraged exchange traded funds. As an example let us assume that you had invested $ 100,000 on January 1st, half of the amount in the ProShares Ultra S&P 500 (2x long, symbol SSO) and half of the amount in the ProShares UltraShort S&P 500 (2x short, symbol SDS).

SSO: Open 2008/01/01 83.70 -> Close 2013/ 02/20 67.79
SDS: Open 2008/01/01 185.77 -> Close 2013/02/20 47.75

After 5 years your initial stake would have decreased from $ 100,000 to $ 53,347, which is close to ruin. This shows the detrimental impact of volatility on returns, which is reinforced by the daily rebalancing of the funds. You don't have a risk neutral investment, if you put half of your money in a leveraged long ETF and the other half in a leveraged short ETF.

I think that understanding risk has more to do with mathematics than with psychology.

Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).

From how you framed your question, I understood that you were saying I had set aside some capital for this strategy alone (see my reply to @ratfink):


Quoting 
Let us assume that you have put some capital aside...

...which is free-lunch, and I modeled exactly this in the Monte Carlo simulations above and it is very clear that your capital doesn't fall anywhere near -20% in 1000 consecutive bets with >99.9% confidence. I think the problem that lies with your response is that you are assuming 100% of your entire account capital is placed on each trade, which is not in the spirit of:


Quoting 
Let us assume that you have put some capital aside...

If you place 100% of your entire account capital on each trade, even if it is in treasuries buy-and-hold (not some leveraged ETF), there is no realistic situation under which you can avoid sizeable risk of insolvency, so good luck.

Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to artemiso for this post:
 
  #20 (permalink)
Elite Member
Portland, OR
 
Futures Experience: None
Platform: tos
Favorite Futures: NQ, SB, 6J, CL, GC
 
Massive l's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,458 since Mar 2011
Thanks: 922 given, 1,822 received


I think the most successful traders are able to balance their risk appetite with risk aversion.
Being a risk taker does not automatically make you a leader. It could make you a fool.
Lots of leaders remain in the background, calculating their next move. They know when to press
and put on that risk and they know when to pull back and observe. It's a delicate dance that is mastered
through lots of thought and preparation.

Psychology > Strategy ≥ Money
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users say Thank You to Massive l for this post:

Reply



futures io > > > Successful traders: Risk Taker or Risk Averse?

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Upcoming Webinars and Events (4:30PM ET unless noted)

Jigsaw Trading: TBA

Elite only

FuturesTrader71: TBA

Elite only

NinjaTrader: TBA

Jan 18

RandBots: TBA

Jan 23

GFF Brokers & CME Group: Futures & Bitcoin

Elite only

Adam Grimes: TBA

Elite only

Ran Aroussi: TBA

Elite only
     

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FT71's Price Risk vs. Information Risk argument keymoo Psychology and Money Management 23 April 1st, 2017 12:46 PM
Webinar: Topsteptrader on Discipline and Risk to be successful Big Mike Psychology and Money Management 16 June 10th, 2014 02:45 PM
Export the risk in terms of Risk/Reward using Van Tharp Multiple R daniv NinjaTrader 0 October 21st, 2012 05:52 AM
CS Global Risk Appetite Signals Risk-Off As Sentiment Stays In 'Panic' Mode Quick Summary News and Current Events 0 December 22nd, 2011 06:40 AM
Traders: Winning Ratio versus Risk/Reward nillz123 Traders Hideout 13 March 23rd, 2011 03:53 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 AM.

Copyright © 2017 by futures io, s.a., Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, +507 833-9432, info@futures.io
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
no new posts
Page generated 2017-12-17 in 0.16 seconds with 20 queries on phoenix via your IP 107.20.115.174