[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

Did you ever re-create your bad-news scenario with the application of
tighter stops when the contracts went up ?

I know the %win and win/loss ratio should go down some.....but I was always
wondering if the trade-off was worth the reduced risk. I always review the
effect of tighter stops and it seems always to be the same......lower Max
DD, but lower %win and lower win/loss.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: CRLeBeau@xxxxxxx [mailto:CRLeBeau@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:27 AM
> To: estrem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: counterargument to c.lebeau's constant bet size under
> drawdown
>
>
> In a message dated 6/12/00 12:19:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
> estrem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> << We had a very nice run-up last year which took
>  us from a one lot to a nine lot. Then the meltdown occurred and
> the system
>  exceeded its historical max DD by a factor of 2. >>
>
>
> My point exactly.  What would your drawdown have been if you were only
> trading a one-lot (or maybe two) prior to the meltdown?
>
> Chuck LeBeau
> traderclub.com
>
>