Jump to content

jeremyjohnolson

Lifetime Members
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

3 Followers

About jeremyjohnolson

  • Birthday 09/01/1977

Recent Profile Visitors

325 profile views
  1. I agree that the biggest challenge standing in the way of success in trading is my own psychology. Like I have said previously, I still consider myself a novice, but even I have been doing this long enough to be able to say I know from personal experience that you are 100% correct in saying that trading is much more about psychology than analytics.
  2. Thanks Martin. I was humbled by the market today and reminded that I am glad I am still in sim. I think I will just go back to the basics for now. I am still doing well with the 1 & 5 min ORBs, I will just keep focusing on those for now and forget this "scalp" idea. The more I think about it, if I am honest with myself, I think the "scalp" idea was more of a way to add something to my trade book that would give me permission to basically do whatever the heck I want lol and it didn't work out so well today!
  3. Here is a losing trade where I tried to get part of the move of a 5 min ORB (breakdown) but got stopped out. Again, the reason I am calling this a scalp and not a 5 min ORB is because normally I would have taken a smaller position and my stop would have been closer to VWAP (the blue line). Maybe this should just be classified as a 5 min ORB though.
  4. Here's one on BABA. It was called out in the room and it was already very extended. So that's why I got in for just a small scalp at the top of the move not expecting it to go much more. I would say this one was chasing and probably not a good trade even though it did work out for me this time. If you look at the 1 min candle chart you can see I did at least get in on a small pull back.
  5. Here's another one I took on BA on the same day. These are 1 min candles. It was reversing from a 5 min ORB break up and coming down. I don't know if "trending" is correct or not since it was so short a time, but that's what I called it.
  6. Here is one I took on BA. I put this under "Scalp" instead of 15m ORB because a normal 15 min ORB I would not have taken as large a position and my stop would have probably been around $220.
  7. Yeah, I updated my post. I went back and looked at Chartlog after posting that to see what they really were. 80% is actually too high for the 1, 5, & 15min ORB. I have only been doing scalps like this and tracking for 2 days, so not really enough to have stable stats on the scalp idea yet. I put what my actual stats are in an edit (see my post above).
  8. Peter B and Martin D, thanks for the helpful advice. It truly is much appreciated. Martin, I totally agree with your point about only doing this with a highly liquid stock (no low float) for the very reasons you mentioned. I had actually already had the same thoughts. Also, I did not think of this idea because other strategies are not working for me. I was just noticing that even when the strategies fail, I still move into the green if even for just a moment and that's what made me think of this because I could do it on all trades and get a good return on the first little movement about 90% of the time, I suspect, and if I have to take a relatively larger loss on that large chunk of shares only 10% of the time, well, then it might still be worth it. I don't know. Here are my stats so far on the 1, 5, & 15 min ORBs which are the only strategies I have been trying to learn and test out lately. I started trading these, and journaling all my trades, on 10/26/2020. Since then on the 1 min ORB I have had a 63% win rate over 48 trades with a profit factor of 1.69 (PF could be better, but still, not too bad, not losing) I take about 1 of these trades a day at the open. On the 5 min ORB I have had a win rate of 70% with a profit factor of 2.19 over 47 positions, again, I usually take about 1 of these a day at the open. Overall I haven't done as well with the 15 min ORB with a win rate of 49% and profit factor of only 0.93 over 37 positions. But for the last 26 of those 37 I changed up the way I was looking at the 15 min ORB, I started giving it more room and taking a smaller position size, since then my profit factor has increased to 1.29 (still not great) and my win rate has been 58% over those 26 trades. Also, if you are curious, I have only been trying this "scalp" trade for 2 trading days so far (I haven't traded this week yet because of getting COVID and personal things going on at home getting in the way). Over 2 days, naturally due to the nature of this "strategy" (or maybe "method" would be a better word) I have taken a lot more trades than 1 a day, in fact over 2 days I took 37 positions. Over those 37 I have had an 81% win rate and a 1.28 profit factor (remember, my profit target and stop are a lot tighter). I think that even though I took 37 positions, since it was only over 2 days time, I still need more trades (more days) to be able to truly say it's stable and working. I think I need to do this for weeks, probably months before I can start to make the assertion that it is working and before my win rate and profit factor start to stabilize into what they really are. It's possible to just get lucky for a couple days. Even a couple months isn't that much time, but it's better than a couple days. I am going to try it because I do not have to stop doing the normal 1 & 5 min ORBs in order to try (at this point only in sim of course), I just have to add an extra interim step. If it fails, then oh well, at least I will know. But yes, definitely, something like this, taking a large position for a small move, would definitely have to be only done in a very liquid stock and not a small cap stock for sure. I would only do it in a stock where the likelihood of it being halted or making really fast really big swings is very small, approaching zero likelihood.
  9. But isn't trading a lot about figuring out what works for you as an individual? So basically every time a new trader is learning then he/she is in essence a little bit of a pioneer because they have to figure it out for themselves. I mean, I hear people say all the time that you cannot just copy someone else, you have to find what works for you. Anyway, before we get too off track on this tangent, I just want to be clear, I do not entire disagree with your point of view. In fact I probably agree with you a whole lot more than I disagree with you. The only thing that just doesn't sit well with me is just being told that I cannot come up with any good ideas. I doubt my scalping in the direction of a proven strategy idea is even original idea anyway. It's really just more of a way of scaling out of a trade if you think about it. At any rate, we can argue and debate all day long I am just going to try it though because I have heard no arguments from you or anyone else that would convince me it is not at least worth trying out. I will let you know how it goes.
  10. I agree with your statement. However, the reason I am including it as a strategy is because there is more to it than just simply a scalp. Maybe I should call it something else to be more descriptive, like "scalp in direction of established strategy" or maybe to be shorter just "strategy scalp". I don't know. Maybe it's a crazy idea lol. I could be going down a wrong road. That's why I posted here, so honestly, I welcome criticism of my idea. I want to know if it's a bad idea or not. I will take all constructive criticism seriously and keep an open mind, but I will also try it out for myself (in sim to begin with). I believe my best shot of succeeding is to listen to others, but also to test and prove things out for myself at the same time. What works for one person will not necessarily work for another since we each think and act differently. So we have to listen to others with experience, but I believe we also have to take what they say with a little bit of a grain of salt because they are not you, they do not know you personally and how you think and how you trade. Also, I read in a few posts back something to the effect that everything that could be thought of regarding trading has already been thought of and not to try to come up with anything new because it won't work. While on one hand I get what I think he is trying to say and I do think there is an element of truth to it, on the other hand I also see this as very "in the box" type thinking. So the element of truth to that sentiment, in my opinion, is that most "out of the box" thinking types of ideas, probably 99% of them, do in deed fail because there is a reason that "in the box" types of ideas are in the box to begin with, because they are tried and true and proven to work. However, that is no reason to simply as a rule discard all outside the box ideas since to do so would be an end to all new innovation. There is no possible way I would ever believe that ALL possible trading ideas have already been thought of and we might as well stop trying to explore new ideas. So yes, I will continue to explore new ideas, and yes, 99% of them will probably fail and prove to be bad ideas, but that is the only way to find that 1% of new ideas that nobody ever thought of before. Or just a new way of looking at an old idea and a new way of implementing it in a way nobody ever thought of before (or at least that I know of).
  11. It could be better or it could be worse, you did not give enough information for me to answer your question because it also depends on what the win rate is. The “R” is only one variable in the equation. I mean if you take it to the extreme and say for arguments sake that the win rate is only 10% for the 2R trade, then that would be an overall losing strategy regardless of the fact that you have 2R on winning to losing trades because you only win on average 10 out of 100 trades. Maybe you win $2 and lose $1, but if you only win 10 times and lose 90 out of 100 trades you have a net loss of $70 on average over time (scale up and add a few zeros onto the end of those numbers if you wish but the math is still the same). So win rate and risk to reward rate both must be taken into account when trying to determine if a strategy is a winning or losing strategy. Also, I was just putting numbers to my example to illustrate a point, I am not saying you would have to take 80 trades before it becomes profitable. It’s already profitable, on average, after your first trade (on average). Lastly, I hear what you are saying about that there might be better set ups, better strategies, but if the quick scalp works 80% of the time, why not do it? What is stopping me from doing both the “superior” 2R (or better) trade strategies and the quick scalp at the same time by taking a large position at first then taking it off to recognize quick profits and holding a relatively smaller position for the bigger move, sizing my position based on good risk management based on where a good technical stop loss level should be placed?
  12. Thank you everyone for your input, it’s been very helpful. I just want to make a couple comments for now. First, this idea I had of scalping is not my only strategy that I have been working on, it’s just one new one I am trying out but it is in conjunction with my other strategies in my play book. In other words, I would not randomly or arbitrarily just jump into any old stock that is ranging or trending, but I would do it based on other indicators which make me believe it will go one direction or another. I guess the big difference is instead of taking a smaller position and waiting for a big move, I take a big position and wait for a small move to increase win rate. My plan is to nest this scalp strategy with my other more conventional strategies so that I take a big position for a short pop in my direction then leave a more normal sized position for the larger move. I have only tried it a couple days so far and it has worked out quite nicely (in sim). I took about 30 trades and had an 82% win rate, but only over two days time, so definitely need more time to see if it’s really working. Also, I got a bit confused on the whole bar example because I do think that overall you come out ahead if you risk say $1 to make $0.80 if your win rate is 80% (just using random numbers to illustrate a point) because you will win more than you lose. So at the end of the day when you add up 80 winners of $0.80 each you get $64.00 less 20 losers of $1.00 each, or $20 in total, you net $44 profit. So yes, mathematically you can win by having a RR less than 1 as long as the win rate is high enough to make up the difference. Is it the way I want to trade all the time, probably not. Of course I would rather get large moves and make bank with fewer trades. That’s why this scalp strategy would just be one more arrow in my quiver and not my only one. Anyway, just wanted to chime in with those couple thoughts for now.
  13. I am thinking of adding a new strategy to my play book. I tried it in sim today and it worked very well. I will continue testing it out in sim for several sample sets of 20 each before I actually try it live to be sure it is working (or prove it doesn't). Please leave any and all comments, shoot holes in it, or let me know if you think it's a good idea, or could use some tweaking, etc... I have noticed that nearly all trades I take from my play book will be in the green at least at some point, even if only for a small moment, even the ones that never fully hit even my first profit target and eventually end up stopping me out completely. So the idea I have is to take the same trade I would normally take from my play book, like the 1 min ORB or 5 min ORB for example, but then to take a much larger position size then would otherwise be justified based on good risk management and a normal technical stop loss level and then only hold the trade for a very small movement in my favor instead of holding out for the full move. The idea is that a normal trade setup from my play book which has at least a 2:1 risk to reward (RR) might only have a 50-60% likelihood of success, because I am waiting for a relatively larger move. Whereas, if I take a quick scalp, in the same direction of the trade from my play book, but only for a very small initial part of the move instead of holding out for the full 2:1 RR move, then I can take a much large share size and be able to justify a much less favorable R:R because I will be able to get a much higher win rate, like around 85-90% or better. For example, I can let the trade go against me by $100 before it turns back around, and I take a quick $80-$90 profit when it pops up (or drops down if short) even if only for just a short little moment. Even though this R:R is terrible, the win rate should be high enough to still make it an overall winning strategy. Potentially I can make the same amount, or better, in a shorter time frame on a relatively small move due to the larger position being taken coupled with the higher win rate. So to sum it up, I am calling this strategy the “Scalp” (I know, not very original) and these are the basics of it: Take a big position for a small (but highly probable, 85-90% win rate) move. Be less concerned about risk to reward (RR) and more with probability of success (win rate). Must have reason for believing stock will move in a certain direction. Examples of reasons can be: - Based on a set up in my trade book - Stock called out in the trading room - Stock is ranging (buy long at bottom of range or short at top of range) - Stock is trending (buy long at bottom of trending range or sell short at top of trending range) - There is a large bid or ask (if large bid, sell short above the large bid. If large ask, buy long below the large ask)
  14. I had a thought today, I think I want to try nesting various trading strategies into one trade. For example, one trade strategy will be for a short little pop, the other for a longer term trend. For example, a lot of times, seems like almost always in fact, when a stock breaks out of the 1, 5, or even 15 min opening range, there is almost always at least a small short little pop (if not a large pop). Knowing this, I can buy a large amount of shares based on a tight stop loss, just below/above the top/bottom of the body of the opening range candle, and another chunk of shares I plan on holding longer for a trend to set in. So this way, I will sell the large chunk quickly and take some quick profits on the little pop right at the start, then hold the lesser portion of the shares for the longer term trend with my stop all the way at VWAP, or some other level based on the 1, 5, or 15 min ORB strategy. That way I am still never violating my risk management rules, but I am also giving myself the chance to make more significant money on the first short little pop since I am taking a much large share size (based on a tighter stop loss level). So then, even if the longer term trend fails to set in, I can still make a significant amount on the initial relatively small pop. Does this seem like a good idea, or not?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.