Monday, March 28, 2005

The First Step

I've convinced myself of the following: Every trader begins with, and is subsequently defined by, his or her edge. Sounds like some hackneyed cliche, right? Not surprising. No other word in this game gets thrown around, glossed over, or assumed a priori like the term "edge". It's the four-letter word of the business; yet unlike expletives of a scatalogical nature, uttering the word repeatedly at a genteel thousand-dollar-a-head seminar, or reading the word in every other paragraph of every other magazine and online article on trader psychology won't raise any eyebrows. Instead, it's the explicit details, the functional guts behind that inscrutable word which are to remain hush-hush and behind closed doors.

An entire industry of self-help books and seminars for traders is built upon this mystery remaining a mystery. With sleight-of-word misdirection those selling a dream will have the buyer lay blame where any struggling trader would promptly assume it would be: in the mind. After all, the "tools of the trade" are all readily available from any standard quotes provider and data backtester; with such an arsenal of market thermometers at hand, the failure to consistently profit must come from some inner place, right? How else could that MACD convergence-divergence cross confirmed with trebly-smoothed and doubly-offset stochastics fail to generate millions by now? Deftly swapping one apparent enigma for another more readily dissected, the "can't do, so teach" crowd behind the word processors have diverted their readers from figuring out the markets into figuring out their own heads.

Now when it comes to making progress as a trader, I'm not knocking mental introspection at all, far from it. What I do take issue with is the assumption that once those psychological problems are "settled", success in the markets should soon follow. I believe instances where psychological stumbling blocks prove to be the main obstacles that prevent one from achieving his trading goals are actually very rare, and almost never true of those who have yet to achieve any level of consistent profitability. For the great majority of rational beings attempting to make a living from the markets, it's the lack of any real edge to begin with which gives rise to those mental issues that may serve as temporary scapegoats but can only conceal the truth for so long. No amount of positive visualization, group empathy, inner "focusing", or even plain willpower can help the trader lacking a defined and applicable edge. Futhermore, these techniques can even serve to mislead and retard any real progress by postponing that crucial first step most struggling traders probably need to admit to and accept of themselves: that they have not yet found an edge at all. Trying to remedy the symptoms before perceiving or conceding to the cause of illness can only result in prolonged frustration.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Really enjoyed reading this blog. Share a lot of the experiences. We all recognise ourselves in the mirror of another trader's struggle; it helps to have the thoughts and feelings articulated at length.

I think you have it right, when you say that psychology is not the place to look for guidance. Profitable trading comes from an edge, and confidence comes from the consistent exploitation of that edge. You cannot invert this order.

About half of the snake-oil industry is founded on the misdirection you have noted ("You're having trouble? Look within"). The other half is devoted to peddling systems that are supposed to confer an edge. Mostly they don't, and lead the purchaser deeper into doubt.

I think the missing piece is that an edge that can actually be exploited in real time is personal; it has to become as much part of you as a golf swing. Or, in chess terms, the principles behind the openings have got to be ingrained, not just the typical move sequences ("setups"). The opening book is not a trader, and possessing a copy does not constitute an edge. Equally, it is possible to construct a genuine personal edge out of sub-optimal components. Hence the paradox that a good trader will make money out of a mediocre system, while a poor trader can lose money with any system; the expert can make an edge out of a modest system, while the tyro has failed to make an edge out of something that could be quite respectable (ie in back-testing).

Personally, I began to feel that I had turned the corner when I realised (better, "came to believe", since it may not be objectively true) that the unifying feature of the successful systems I knew about was probability. Applying this to entrances, to exits and to sizing has enabled me to string together highly non-random sequences of profitable trades. Which is good for the confidence. It has not enabled me to exclude the occasional large blowup, because the improbable happens. But when you have a set of principles that you can apply with high confidence of any given trade being positive, the mindset improves a lot, and total performance follows.

Anyhow, your blog struck a chord, particularly the later items. Thanks again.

4:41 AM  
Blogger illiquid said...

Nice post! I think what you wrote on edges being personal and "ingrained" is dead-on, as was the chess analogy, very precise and graceful. Most of us are still robotically applying "sub-optimal components" without going deeper into what makes them work -- it's this lack of looking into the principles behind them that make the components sub-optimal in the first place.

You've pre-empted my next post though, and for that I may never forgive you. Hehe, jk -- I'm just jealous you probably took a few minutes to put forth so eloquently what takes me weeks to spew out intelligibly. Many thanks for posting, hope to hear from you again.

illi

9:41 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

webhosting
webhosting