How do you manage trailing stop on XAUUSD during strong trends?

New comment
 
Hello traders,
I have been testing different trailing stop techniques on XAUUSD (M1) and noticed that a fixed Take Profit often closes trades too early during strong Gold trends.
Instead of using a fixed TP, I tested a ladder-based trailing approach where the Stop Loss moves only after price reaches the next predefined level. This allows profitable trades to continue while gradually locking in profit.
I'm interested in hearing from experienced Gold traders:
Do you prefer a fixed Take Profit or trailing stop?
How do you avoid getting stopped out by normal Gold volatility?
Have you found a trailing method that works consistently during strong trends?
 
Vilas Javle:
Do you prefer a fixed Take Profit or trailing stop?

I prefer a dynamic exit which more or less trails on the client-side. For example, an EMA(13) does fairly well─waiting for price to cross it.

Vilas Javle:
How do you avoid getting stopped out by normal Gold volatility?

If you're worried about getting stopped out right away, use a dynamic exit with more leeway. For example, a Supertrend or a Chandelier.

Vilas Javle:
Have you found a trailing method that works consistently during strong trends?

These are all different forms of the same question to some extent. A strong trend is basically a windfall. In that case, any of the above dynamic exits will continuing chasing price.

 
Ryan L Johnson #:

I prefer a dynamic exit which more or less trails on the client-side. For example, an EMA(13) does fairly well─waiting for price to cross it.

If you're worried about getting stopped out right away, use a dynamic exit with more leeway. For example, a Supertrend or a Chandelier.

These are all different forms of the same question to some extent. A strong trend is basically a windfall. In that case, any of the above dynamic exits will continuing chasing price.

Thanks for your feedback. I appreciate your suggestions. I'm currently testing a ladder-based trailing stop on XAUUSD (M1) and comparing it with EMA-based trailing. I'll also test Chandelier Exit to compare the results. Thanks again!
 

Methods I'd rank

  1. 🥇 Swing High/Low + ATR filter
  2. 🥈 Chandelier Exit (3×ATR)
  3. 🥉 ATR trailing stop (2.5×ATR)
  4. EMA 20/34 trailing
  5. Fixed-point trailing stop
 i recommend the above 
 
Gunapu Sankara Rao #:

Methods I'd rank

  1. 🥇 Swing High/Low + ATR filter
  2. 🥈 Chandelier Exit (3×ATR)
  3. 🥉 ATR trailing stop (2.5×ATR)
  4. EMA 20/34 trailing
  5. Fixed-point trailing stop
 i recommend the above 
Thanks for sharing your ranking. ATR and Chandelier Exit are definitely popular approaches. My current goal is to compare those methods with a ladder-based trailing stop that only moves the Stop Loss after price reaches predefined price levels. I'll backtest them under the same XAUUSD (M1) conditions and compare the results. Thanks for the suggestion!
 
Vilas Javle #:
Thanks for your feedback. I appreciate your suggestions. I'm currently testing a ladder-based trailing stop on XAUUSD (M1) and comparing it with EMA-based trailing. I'll also test Chandelier Exit to compare the results. Thanks again!

You're most welcome.

As a side note, I always use a fixed stop as a backup too─something like 50 big points away. Your backup stop size will, of course, depend on your average executed dynamic exit size. The general idea is to maintain a server-side stop a reasonable distance away from the current price. In this way, the stop never interferes with the dynamic exit but acts like an insurance policy for failed local software, hardware, networks, and/or power grids.

 

Ryan and Gunapu already covered the main dynamic-exit families (EMA cross, Supertrend, Chandelier, ATR multiples), so I'll add the angle I think matters most on M1 Gold: separate the trailing distance from the trailing trigger.

Every ATR-based method shares the same structural weakness in a strong trend - ATR expands exactly when the move accelerates, so a 2.5-3x ATR trail widens right when you'd want it to lock in more. You give back a big chunk on the first sharp pullback, and the multiple that looked right in the backtest was fitted to one volatility regime.

What tends to hold through strong Gold trends is trailing on structure instead of on distance: only ratchet the stop under the last confirmed higher-low (swing closed, not intrabar). In an impulsive leg the swing lows keep printing higher, so the stop follows the trend's own skeleton and ignores the noise between swings - it only comes out when structure actually breaks (a lower low), which is also the first real evidence the trend is done. Your ladder is a fixed-level cousin of this; the risk is the levels are pinned to the backtested move rather than to live structure.

On M1 specifically I'd keep two things: confirm swings on close only (M1 wicks on Gold will hunt an intrabar stop constantly), and keep Ryan's fixed backup stop server-side as insurance - the structural trail is the working exit, the hard stop is the power-failure/gap net. Worth backtesting the structural trail against your ladder on the same sample and comparing not just net profit but average giveback from peak per trade.

New comment