Why is trading without stop-loss considered absurd for many! - page 9
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I did. The screenshot you presented is from the cent account presented in the signals.
Oksana.))
I started with 5000 - I used 0,10 lot.
Now I deposit 38500 and I also use 0,10 lot.
In the account you have presented a screen - not only 0.1 lot, but also 0.15 0.3 0.7 1.05 0.35.
The starting lot is 0.10, you enter with 0.10 lot while the trades are in the black, as soon as you go in the red, the lot increases.
In that account that you have provided a screenshot - entries not only by lot 0.1, but also 0.15 0.3 0.7 1.05 0.35
I do not understand the question, so I cannot give an exact answer.
A single cumulative trade without stops with a depo of 1000 is equal to a trade with a stop of 1000 at a depo of 10000. Although in both cases you can try to avoid losing trades. However, in the first case this implies possible huge drawdowns and sour face in front of the investor (even if the investor has a mustache). In the second case, the maximum equity drawdown is 10% and good nerves. For example, a full-scale loss in the first case occurs once in 5 years, while in the case of the same trading but with a stop-loss, the loss will never occur. Thus, by dividing the deposit into parts, we reduce the chance of losing the deposit, even with the same nature and style of trading.
Trading without stops - is pure complacency and the belief in chance. With stops also faith in luck, but in multiples of the number of attempts to a lesser extent. The presence of stops is a sign of a well-thought-out system, although they should not work outside of major circumstances.
Trading without stops is not absurd, but not the best use of your money, that's all. Just think about how many times this year alone there have been multiple spikes of several thousand 5-digit pips in major pairs? So far, we have been lucky, but what if the next spike is the last one for the depo? How big should the deposit be, that it could survive such spikes with a 0,01 lot? - Wouldn't it be better to bank with such risks and profitability?
To each his own, clearly, everyone is free to decide what to do. I do not insist on anything.
Oxana Tambur, do you exit by pips, by increment (fix profit), by time or by indicators?
A single cumulative trade without stops with a depo of 1000 is equal to a trade with a stop of 1000 at a depo of 10000. Although in both cases you can try to avoid losing trades. However, in the first case this implies possible huge drawdowns and sour face in front of the investor (even if the investor has a mustache). In the second case, the maximum equity drawdown is 10% and good nerves. For example, a full-scale loss in the first case occurs once in 5 years, while in the case of the same trading but with a stop-loss, the loss will never occur. Thus, by dividing the deposit into parts, we reduce the chance of losing the deposit, even with the same nature and style of trading.
Trading without stops - is pure complacency and the belief in chance. With stops also faith in luck, but in multiples of the number of attempts to a lesser extent. The presence of stops is a sign of a well-thought-out system, although they should not work outside of major circumstances.
Trading without stops is not absurd, but not the best use of your money, that's all. Just think about how many times this year alone there have been multiple spikes of several thousand 5-digit pips in major pairs? So far, we have been lucky, but what if the next spike is the last one for the depo? How big should the deposit be, that it could survive such spikes with a 0,01 lot? - Isn't it better to bank with such risks and profitability?
To each his own, clearly, everyone is free to decide what to do. I do not insist on anything.