There are two main ways these days can go.
How to deal with Deep Red/ Reversal Days (Thread)
There are two main ways these days can go.
It’s key to understand that emotion can never be eliminated from your trading, that isn’t the goal and is not achievable.
How are leadership stocks acting in the overall context? Are they above 21DMA, near 21DMA, above 10DMA (considered extended).
For your own positions, you should know their trends, profit cushion, position size, etc...
Grading your stocks is extremely helpful. Your worst stocks should be trimmed first when you feel portfolio pressure.
How to Grade your Stocks @mwebster1971
https://t.co/VkaCCJhdiu
Know your best and worst stocks, key levels for the market, and have a pre-made plan to lower or increase exposure depending on what happens.
Setting alerts is extremely helpful here.
As mentioned before, it's not just your positions that need to be managed but also your emotions.
This way you can keep track of your current state of mind and relate the current environment to past instances.
These are the strongest stocks and making a list and keeping track of these will benefit you when the market pressure lifts.
https://t.co/zDX4FvqVLk
However, if the market retraces and then reverses back up quickly, it is possible that it was just a shakeout.
Note stocks that bounced back quickly when the market rebounded, formed higher lows intraday. Sort your lists by % from the low and by highest daily closing ranges.
If you were stopped out of a stock and it comes back through your sell point, consider buying it back if that meets your system/plans.
More from TraderLion
You May Also Like
I think a plausible explanation is that whatever Corbyn says or does, his critics will denounce - no matter how much hypocrisy it necessitates.
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
One of the oddest features of the Labour tax row is how raising allowances, which the media allowed the LDs to describe as progressive (in spite of evidence to contrary) through the coalition years, is now seen by everyone as very right wing
— Tom Clark (@prospect_clark) November 2, 2018
Corbyn opposes the exploitation of foreign sweatshop-workers - Labour MPs complain he's like Nigel
He speaks up in defence of migrants - Labour MPs whinge that he's not listening to the public's very real concerns about immigration:
He's wrong to prioritise Labour Party members over the public:
He's wrong to prioritise the public over Labour Party
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x