[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: counterargument to c.lebeau's constant bet size under drawdown



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

> > Or, if you want to pyramid and be conservative, how about starting
> > smaller, like 3% or 4% risk (maybe 3 contracts to start), and once
> > you increase size, don't let it go smaller? That's what gave the
> > best combo of high total returns and a smooth curve on my tests. 
> 
> Works great -- as long as your meltdown period doesn't last too long. 
>  If it does, and you don't decrease the size, you're much more likely 
> to auger it into the ground at high speed.  :-(  Play with this 
> spreadsheet for a while and I think you might re-think that approach.

Remember you are only risking (for example) half as much at the equity
peak using the non-reducing method.... say 3% instead of 6%. So, by the
time your method gets down to trading the same cts as mine, you have
already lost half your account. They can both go broke. The question is
which one will do it sooner. Ah, just got your spreadsheet. I'll play
with it.

-- 
  Dennis