Although this doesn't say much about the actual strategy's, but i'll stay on point.
I'm not trying to do that either, I can't give out strategies to anyone when I'm still looking for that perfect strategy myself
. There are millions of strategies out there, I'm just grouping them based on the two most relevant emotions that drive the market.
Traders can use both approaches because being flexible is important. The market is very dynamic, and as price action changes, you also need to be able to adapt...There are times when you need to be aggressive as a trader and other times when you need to be more conservative. This doesn't mean you lack discipline, it simply means you are trading what the market is offering..Sometimes, you will come across setups that require larger stop-losses, and you may notice that the risk to reward ratio is much smaller than what you normally trade. Those are the situations where you can apply a more conservative approach..You should wait for strong confirmation before entering the trade so you can keep your risk small. Being flexible as a trader is a big advantage.
This actually makes sense. But I believe this will ultimately make traders get confused at some point with their setup. However, if a trader masters the art of being flexible in such a way, then that's an elite trader right there.
Hello guys, hope you all are having a great day.
Recently, I observed something about trading strategies. Generally, the market is fundamentally driven by two emotions, greed and fear. Every single trader is driven by these two emotions, and they create their strategies around them.
I refuse to agree that every trader is either driven by fear or by greed. There are traders who may have had their strategies built around fear or greed earlier when they started trading, but with experience, they have come to a point where they now have a strategy built from balance, a place of zero emotion, not fear, not greed, just strategy based on strong principles.
These sorts of traders are few, hence the reason the number of consistently successful traders is so small.
Good point. If one can truly control their emotions, they'll attain mastery -- He who conquers himself is the mightiest warrior (Confucius).
But there is a nuance to this, I don't necessarily think what makes traders stay at the top 1% -- or whatever percent -- successful traders is because of just "being in control of your emotions"; I think there is more to it. One thing I've seen and observed as the difference between the successful and unsuccessful trader is the account size. You can have the best strategy, mind-set, etc, but without a large account size, you're in a massive disadvantage. Small accounts don't really stand much of a chance in the market.
I personally have two trading accounts, i refer to them as the “big account” and “small account”.
The small account is for SCALPING, but the difference here is that i’m more active in opening positions aggressively, since the goal is to grow the account, the risks taken are naturally greater, as positions are opened and closed within a relatively short timeframe.
The large account is for SWING, i often open a position only once a week or even once every two weeks, depending on the volatility of the asset being traded. Here, i also pay closer attention to risk management and weigh my options more carefully before opening a position.
It all comes down to each of us. Always use a method that feels comfortable for you, don't just follow what everyone else is doing, because what works for others may not necessarily work for you. It’s better to use your own method.
Wow, this is a very aggressive setup, I guess you are taking the aggressive growth route. You're the only exception in the crowd of commenters who are all going for the Risk-Averse
I think this isn't about what kind of strategy you chose or prefer, but what works for you. And realistically speaking, who does not want the aggressive-growth strategy where we won't miss out any opportunity and maximize our profits, we all want it but the question is, does it work for majority?
That's why majority will only stick to risk-averse strategy, not because its the safest one, but because we don't have choice either, rather than seeing high risk and quick losing of our coins, I guess its better to stick with the safer one instead, and that is risk-averse strategy.
This is true to some extent. What if one has a big enough capital to entertain the risk? Then I think they'll be more inclined to taking more risks to maximize profit, don't you think?
