Hedging vs Stop Loss | Page 7 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Mathematical hedging strategy without a stop loss 22 replies

Stop Loss vs. Hidden Stop Loss 26 replies

Who is best ? stop loss or trailing stop 46 replies

EA questions: Hedging, Closing Orders at 00:00GMT, Moving Stop Loss 1 reply

Stop Loss and Trailing Stop 0 replies

Attachments: Hedging vs Stop Loss
Exit Attachments

Hedging vs Stop Loss

  • #121
  • May 31, 2014 7:31am May 31, 2014 7:31am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} That's how you address someone who has tried to help you see some truth. You're not open minded at all. Long EURUSD at 1.36, short EURUSD at 1.3599 (have to pay the spread). EURUSD moves up to 1.37. Profit for account -1 pip - commissions Flat EURUSD at 1.36. EURUSD moves up to 1.37. Profit for account 0 > -1pip - commission.
Truth is only your perception but my reality.
  • #122
  • May 31, 2014 7:34am May 31, 2014 7:34am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} Clueless, muddled thinking and unable to admit that you're wrong. You are failing as a trader. You'll deny it, because your ego won't let you admit it. But we both know you are failing.
So which bit am I wrong about?
  • #123
  • May 31, 2014 7:43am May 31, 2014 7:43am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} That's how you address someone who has tried to help you see some truth. You're not open minded at all.

Supra,

As I've already stated I totally agree with your statements about hedging not having any benefit on a mathematical basis. However, if you are truly interested in helping traders, surely you can see that insulting them is not going to accomplish that. Your posts come off as very antagonistic and demeaning. Now if you want to just argue, then that is fine, but if you want to be a "teacher" then it won't.
My advice (no its not worth much)...if the frustration of someone not "getting" your point becomes so high that you have to resort to insulting them, then it's time to discontinue the lesson.
  • #124
  • May 31, 2014 7:51am May 31, 2014 7:51am
Quoting spyderman
{quote} Supra, As I've already stated I totally agree with your statements about hedging not having any benefit on a mathematical basis. However, if you are truly interested in helping traders, surely you can see that insulting them is not going to accomplish that. Your posts come off as very antagonistic and demeaning. Now if you want to just argue, then that is fine, but if you want to be a "teacher" then it won't. My advice (no its not worth much)...if the frustration of someone not "getting" your point becomes so high that you have to resort...
I try to be polite to everyone who is polite to me. Though I may be rude to someone who has been rude to me. Someone who wants to argue against facts even after those facts are pointed out, is rude. Someone who wants to post nonsense they don't understand is rude.

I think your advice is good and I should stop. It's no wonder those with knowledge hold back and give very little except hints. I do feel sorry for the humblethe open-minded and the polite ones who will be deprived of it though, because I was once humble and looking to learn and there was loads of junk on trading forums, and very few gems. Perhaps that's the way it always will be. Not that the hedging argument is a gem, but anyway, in another 8 years there will be another argument on the same topic no doubt.
  • #125
  • May 31, 2014 8:51am May 31, 2014 8:51am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} I try to be polite to everyone who is polite to me. Though I may be rude to someone who has been rude to me. Someone who wants to argue against facts even after those facts are pointed out, is rude. Someone who wants to post nonsense they don't understand is rude. I think your advice is good and I should stop. It's no wonder those with knowledge hold back and give very little except hints. I do feel sorry for the humblethe open-minded and the polite ones who will be deprived of it though, because I was once humble and looking to learn and...
Talk about muddled thinking!

I try to be polite to everyone who is polite to me.

Excuse me!! but you were first with the insults

to argue against facts even after those facts are pointed out

Which 'facts' did I argue with exactly The Euro? Even 1999 is still 15 yrs but I think it was traded before that as the ECU and it was certainly quoted by the banks on trading platforms before that.
Or maybe cable ranging - even you admitted that it ranged between 2 and 1.4 - This might be difficult for you to grasp but ranging means that price tends to return to where it started.

I think your advice is good and I should stop.

Most sensible thing you've said for a long time.

I'll ask you again - which bit am I wrong about exactly?
  • #126
  • Edited 9:21am May 31, 2014 9:07am | Edited 9:21am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} Talk about muddled thinking! I try to be polite to everyone who is polite to me. Excuse me!! but you were first with the insults to argue against facts even after those facts are pointed out Which 'facts' did I argue with exactly The Euro? Even 1999 is still 15 yrs but I think it was traded before that as the ECU and it was certainly quoted by the banks on trading platforms before that. Or maybe cable ranging - even you admitted that it ranged between 2 and 1.4 - This might be difficult for you to grasp but ranging means that price tends...
No, I wasn't first to be impolite. This is explained in my previous post.

EURUSD was not traded 20 years ago. You can accept this or not. I have tried to help you, you throw it back in my face. So wrong there.

You suggest that a currency will always return to par with certainty. All I need to disprove that, is find a single price in the past that we haven't returned to. I gave you lots of prices when I only needed one to disprove it. Again you threw it back in my face. If you're hoping for it to return in 200 years or something, then obviously that's of no practical use. Perhaps you can also tell me when the French Franc will return to its 1980 level. So wrong there.

You wrote about hedging and how it was different from flat. That if you didn't know direction, you should go long and short and make money. I wrote an example of that and showed that hedging was worse than being flat in all circumstances. You want to argue it and pretend you're being open minded when you're not. So wrong there too.

You then state that 70% of trades will go into profit. Can you back up this statistic, because I think it is wrong. Where is the proof of that? And what kind of trades? All trades regardless of stop position? All trades without a stop? What about the other '30%' how much does that lose you?

How many more things that you're wrong about do you want me to find?

You have V as your avatar. Perhaps then you'll understand, that I'm only giving truth here, nothing more. You don't have to like it, most people don't. Using Hedging will never help you mathematically/financially, it's an illusion. It always is the same or worse than not using it. Again, you don't have to accept that, but it's true.
  • #127
  • May 31, 2014 9:21am May 31, 2014 9:21am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} Truth is only your perception but my reality.
So what you're really saying is that it's not your fault.. It's mine
like totally failure brah
  • #128
  • May 31, 2014 9:46am May 31, 2014 9:46am
Quoting simonb
{quote} So what you're really saying is that it's not your fault.. It's mine
No, think about it, what I am saying is that truth is subjective and that what I believe to be true is TRUE to me, but that may not be what you believe to be true and neither of us is necessarily right..

For centuries it was 'true' the earth was flat until it wasn't true anymore.
  • #129
  • May 31, 2014 9:50am May 31, 2014 9:50am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} No, think about it, what I am saying is that truth is subjective and that what I believe to be true is TRUE to me, but that may not be what you believe to be true and neither of us is necessarily right.. For centuries it was 'true' the earth was flat until it wasn't true anymore.
That's rather convenient though

if you don;t believe in a universal truth .. How can you argue for a universal wrong.

Like your thread "Are you awake"

12 hours of the day.. I'm awake
like totally failure brah
  • #130
  • Edited 10:12am May 31, 2014 9:58am | Edited 10:12am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} No, think about it, what I am saying is that truth is subjective and that what I believe to be true is TRUE to me, but that may not be what you believe to be true and neither of us is necessarily right.. For centuries it was 'true' the earth was flat until it wasn't true anymore.
It wasn't true that the earth was flat...ever. But yes, it's a decent analogy of those who believe in hedging.

You can argue that truth is subjective if you want, or you can learn something. I do have some sympathy towards the personal truth idea, but part of that working requires that you do actually spend the time to discover what is true and what is not, not just make up things and stick to it obstinately arguing that they are true.

If you go and check hedging genuinely, you will discover that it offers no benefit. If you go and check whether EURUSD was traded 20 years ago, you will discover that it was not. If you don't check, you remain ignorant. So if you want to find a personal truth, actually look for it. A personal truth is not something that is just there because it's convenient for you, nor to make excuses for laziness. It's not sufficient to simply say it's true to you, and therefore it's valid, if you haven't made an honest effort to question whether it is true.

In some things there is a clear right and a clear wrong. Not all things, but some. In trading each trade makes a profit, breaks even or is a loser. There's no getting around it. It's hard for some people to accept that world, they want to argue and bargain with it and pray that things be better and that price will come back for them to let them out breakeven, or think their own personal truth matters. But it doesn't.
  • #131
  • May 31, 2014 10:13am May 31, 2014 10:13am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} No, I wasn't first to be impolite. This is explained in my previous post. EURUSD was not traded 20 years ago. You can accept this or not. I have tried to help you, you throw it back in my face. So wrong there. You suggest that a currency will always return to par with certainty. All I need to disprove that, is find a single price in the past that we haven't returned to. I gave you lots of prices when I only needed one to disprove it. Again you threw it back in my face. If you're hoping for it to return in 200 years or something, then obviously...
EURUSD was not traded 20 years ago. You can accept this or not. I have tried to help you, you throw it back in my face. So wrong there.
Ok so its where it was xx years ago - same applies.
You suggest that a currency will always return to par with certainty(no I said 70%).
All I need to disprove that, is find a single price in the past that we haven't returned to. I gave you lots of prices when I only needed one to disprove it. Again you threw it back in my face. If you're hoping for it to return in 200 years or something, then obviously that's of no practical use. Perhaps you can also tell me when the French Franc will return to its 1980 level. So wrong there.The Swiss Franc was converted to the Euro at abt 1-1 so same applies.
You wrote about hedging and how it was different from flat. That if you didn't know direction, you should go long and short and make money. I wrote an example of that and showed that hedging was worse than being flat in all circumstances. You want to argue it and pretend you're being open minded when you're not. So wrong there too. I could also post some hypothetical trades showing how hedging doubled the gain of single trades
You then state that 70% of trades will go into profit.If currencies range 70% of time - eventually they will return to where they started Can you back up this statistic, because I think it is wrong. Where is the proof of that? Just look at almost any chart they all return to the start point And what kind of trades? All trades regardless of stop position?Thought we were discussing hedging - ie no stops(you really are confused aren't you) All trades without a stop? What about the other '30%' how much does that lose you? Obviously you need to use a bit of nous and choose one from the 70% but even with the others you just need to hedge more and develop more trades in direction of trend maybe.
How many more things that you're wrong about do you want me to find Keep going you haven't found any yet.
You have V as your avatar. Perhaps then you'll understand, that I'm only giving truth here, nothing more. You don't have to like it, most people don't. As I mentioned before truth is in the eye of the beholder so I neither like nor dislike it
  • #132
  • May 31, 2014 10:22am May 31, 2014 10:22am
Quoting simonb
{quote} That's rather convenient though if you don;t believe in a universal truth .. How can you argue for a universal wrong. Like your thread "Are you awake" 12 hours of the day.. I'm awake
You're not thinking about it - almost everything an individual beleves is unique to that person and not necessarily shared by anyone else. even right and wrong.

For instance it was a universal truth that Saddam had WMD's until he didn't, - unfortunately we killed a million Iraqis before we found out.
  • #133
  • May 31, 2014 10:30am May 31, 2014 10:30am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} EURUSD was not traded 20 years ago. You can accept this or not. I have tried to help you, you throw it back in my face. So wrong there. Ok so its where it was xx years ago - same applies. You suggest that a currency will always return to par with certainty(no I said 70%). All I need to disprove that, is find a single price in the past that we haven't returned to. I gave you lots of prices when I only needed one to disprove it. Again you threw it back in my face. If you're hoping for it to return in 200 years or something, then obviously...
The worst thing is that you're not honest with yourself. You did say that price would return to par with certainty. Then added on 70%. Well certainty is 100%. So which is it? Certainty or 70%. Make up your mind. Don't use words you don't understand. Don't write about things you don't understand. Be honest with yourself.

You write 'same applies'. Ok, so you're admitting you were wrong but your ego doesn't let you say it outright, so you wanna hide it behind 'same applies'. At least that is progress, you've admitted you were wrong on that.

The French Franc is not the same as the Swiss Franc, again, think a little bit more in future.

You say you could also post that hedging double gains. You couldn't. I have requested you to post some trades, and in every case i can show that you can get the same gains without hedging. So you're still arguing the point that you're wrong about. Go ahead and post a few trades and show how hedging helped.

If currencies range 70% of the time you make a conclusion. But there's no evidence that currencies range 70% of the time. Maybe they range 80% or maybe they range 60%. Do you know? If so, where is the proof. I asked for it, you have none. Are all currencies the same? Why isn't the stat more realistic? How can it be that every single currency ranges at the exact same %? You want me to tell you why? Because it's a nonsense statistic that you have no evidence for, that's why.

You say they all return to the starting point on any chart, yet when I gave you prices on GBPUSD thathave never been returned to, you threw it back in my face.

You're now suggesting that I'm confused even though it's you. The arrogance from you is quite simply disgusting. Wake up!
  • #134
  • May 31, 2014 10:31am May 31, 2014 10:31am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} You're not thinking about it - almost everything an individual beleves is unique to that person and not necessarily shared by anyone else. even right and wrong. For instance it was a universal truth that Saddam had WMD's until he didn't, - unfortunately we killed a million Iraqis before we found out.
My individual unique thought is that everything is always as it should be. That's convenient enough for me
like totally failure brah
  • #135
  • May 31, 2014 10:32am May 31, 2014 10:32am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} It wasn't true that the earth was flat...ever. But yes, it's a decent analogy of those who believe in hedging. You can argue that truth is subjective if you want, or you can learn something. I do have some sympathy towards the personal truth idea, but part of that working requires that you do actually spend the time to discover what is true and what is not, not just make up things and stick to it obstinately arguing that they are true. If you go and check hedging genuinely, you will discover that it offers no benefit....
Yep we know that now but if you had said that in 16th century you'd have been burnt at stake.
  • #136
  • May 31, 2014 10:35am May 31, 2014 10:35am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} The worst thing is that you're not honest with yourself. You did say that price would return to par with certainty. Then added on 70%. Well certainty is 100%. So which is it? Certainty or 70%. Make up your mind. Don't use words you don't understand. Don't write about things you don't understand. Be honest with yourself. You write 'same applies'. Ok, so you're admitting you were wrong but your ego doesn't let you say it outright, so you wanna hide it behind 'same applies'. At least that is progress, you've admitted you were wrong on that....
he French Franc is not the same as the Swiss Franc, again, think a little bit more in future

That was a typo meant French
  • #137
  • May 31, 2014 10:35am May 31, 2014 10:35am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} Yep we know that now but if you had said that in 16th century you'd have been burnt at stake.
Again, another clueless statement. Do you know what date it was proposed that the earth was not flat? Do you have any idea? Because it's very old, and dates way before the 16th century. As I said in my previous post wake up!
  • #138
  • May 31, 2014 10:39am May 31, 2014 10:39am
Quoting stewrigh
{quote} Yep we know that now but if you had said that in 16th century you'd have been burnt at stake.

The concept of a spherical Earth dates back to around the 6th century BC,[1] but remained a matter of philosophical speculation until the 3rd century BC, when Hellenistic astronomy established the spherical shape of the earth as a physical given.

(wiki)
  • #139
  • May 31, 2014 10:39am May 31, 2014 10:39am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} The worst thing is that you're not honest with yourself. You did say that price would return to par with certainty. Then added on 70%. Well certainty is 100%. So which is it? Certainty or 70%. Make up your mind. Don't use words you don't understand. Don't write about things you don't understand. Be honest with yourself. You write 'same applies'. Ok, so you're admitting you were wrong but your ego doesn't let you say it outright, so you wanna hide it behind 'same applies'. At least that is progress, you've admitted you were wrong on that....
The arrogance from you is quite simply disgusting. Wake up!

Look in the mirror -
  • #140
  • May 31, 2014 10:41am May 31, 2014 10:41am
Quoting SupraSense
{quote} Again, another clueless statement. Do you know what date it was proposed that the earth was not flat? Do you have any idea? Because it's very old, and dates way before the 16th century. As I said in my previous post wake up!
Yes thats true but it wasn't accepted as truth for centuries by most ppl and truth is subjective.
0 traders viewing now