Because doing so is participating, not anticipating.
No it isn't. It bounces off a clear bottom and you go short! WHat, you thought there would immediately be another one?! This is typical of your silliness. Either you believe you're right, which makes you thick, or you just want to be obstinate, which means as I've said many times, your head's in the wrong place. Who do you think you're kidding, after you've done it so much? Not me. Presumably you don't yet realise you're doing it so I'm being patient. If I were your boss you'd have been out by now.
1. Go with the trend
2. Have a catalyst
3. Look at volume
4. Look at MACD
5. Look at moving average crossovers
6. Have a pullback
7. Participate, don't anticipate
8. Always set a stop loss, and don't stay in for long if it's not working.
9. Look at related markets, especially bitcoin in relation to crypto.
That's not a bad set, but it misses loads out. What about Levels? What about the end of yesterday, or premarket highs, accumulation, distribution, candles, higher time frames,......?. Unfortunately you didn't apply the ones you SAY you used correctly on the trades I looked at.
I believe you look at a losing trade after the fact, and try to find domethng to justify it. Can only say that's childish.
Maybe you did right on some , I don't know. You don't need them all, though any can matter if it's big enough on the day. If you just go off levels and catalysts you'be mostly right.
If you applied all of those, I imagine you'd hardly ever trade, but you'd much less often lose. You have to be able to assess them at a look.
I don't know what you did in your former life but when faced with a situation, I expect you checked many many things, most of which weren't operating at the time.
Meanwhile, you are making tens of thousands every day.
No, I don't even trade every day, you made that up. Stop lying please. You keep doing it. Work out your frustrations somewhere else.
On a strategy which frequently doesn't seem to follow the things you say to do.
Using those as inputs doesn't mean they all have to be ticked off as positives. It does mean they shouldn't be big and negative though.
I don't make a list, I look at the situation, click around checking, , then the processing time is minimal. But I can see a trend, and an entry point, and a pullback, all at a glance. You're getting them wrong, then going to town on trying to justify what was obviously wrong.
Would you still try to say this was a downtrend?? Probably. A bit pathetic, isn't it.
"Of course I am" - quite often, yes. I often show where. I just showed you a screenshot from a 250k win over a few months. I didn't show you a x2 6 figure win on SMCI in about a fortnight where I just had a look every day. Lots of little trades don't win, obviously. The point is not to let them be big losses.
The last couple of days, I wasn't looking all day, but there were loads of opportunities for trades. This was yesterday. I logged in about 5pm.
Local levels had set up - yellow - and from earlier in the day.
It was at about the dotted line which was a huge level from earlier. I looked at the qqqs irc or other names, and went short about where the red line is. NVDA was due to go down from the news. The volume was ok, it had been rising a while, so bouncing off the level looked likely. My stop was at the level.
So I got about 2.5% , watching for reversals and only entering the shorts. They have easy patterns to spot those on the 1 minute. See??
Then it was ranging from about 1800, see?
VWAP is white. - often makes a level but it depends where you anchor it so that shifts the level a bit
.
So that was range trading between the levels of where the bid line now is and the blue. If you go long on the bottoms and short at the tops you coome out ok even if you miss one. As you see, an hour later there were higher and lower prices to close on so no trade lost.. Doesn't always do that. Was trading longs and shorts so got the bigger move in at about 21.00. Mostly, anyway.
All quite logical, predictable, based on just the levels and an eye on the qqqs. I was lucky at 21:00 perhaps, there could have been a much bigger jump because that was the quarterly redistribution of assets in the SP500.
That was predicted to cause an Apple drop so I was holding a short on that from 214, the day before (expensive at credit card swap rates).
So the apple trade paid much the same, at about 3.4%, with much less hassle than nvda.
You work it out, 6.8% of what I trade with. The share size shows there, at 2k shares of nvda. A bit over $16k. I had a couple of small stop-outs elsewhere, which came to about 800.
