Effective inefficiency

Stop-Loss. This combination of words sounds like a magic spell for impatient investors. It's really challenging to watch your account get smaller and smaller. That's why people came up with this magic amulet. Go to the market, don't be afraid, just put it on. Let your profits run, but limit your losses - place a Stop-Loss order.

Its design is simple: when the paper loss reaches the amount agreed upon with you in advance, your position will be closed. The paper loss will become real. And here I have a question: “Does this invention stop the loss?” It seems that on the contrary - you take it with you. Then it is not a Stop-Loss, but a Take-Loss. This will be more honest, but let's continue with the classic name.

Another thing that always bothered me was that everyone has their own Stop-Loss. For example, if a company shows a loss, I can find out about it from the reports. Its meaning is the same for everyone and does not depend on those who look at it. With Stop-Loss, it's different. As many people as there are Stop-Losses. There is a lot of subjectivity in it.

For adherents of fundamental analysis, all this looks very strange. I cannot agree that I spent time researching a company, became convinced of the strength of its business, and then simply quoted a price at which I would lock in my loss. I don't think Benjamin Graham would approve either. He knew better than anyone that the market loved to show off its madness when it came to stock prices. So Stop-Loss is part of this madness?

Not quite so. There are many strategies that do not rely on fundamental analysis. They live by their own principles, where Stop-Loss plays a key role. Based on its size relative to the expected profit, these strategies can be divided into three types.

Stop-Loss is approximately equal to the expected profit size

This includes high-frequency strategies of traders who make numerous trades during the day. These can be manual or automated operations. Here we are talking about the advantages that a trader seeks to gain, thanks to modern technical means, complex calculations or simply intuition. In such strategies, it is critical to have favorable commission conditions so as not to give up all the profits to maintaining the infrastructure. The size of profit and loss per trade is approximately equal and insignificant in relation to the size of the account. The main expectation of a trader is to make more positive trades than negative ones.

Stop-Loss is several times less than the expected profit

The second type includes strategies based on technical analysis. The number of transactions here is significantly less than in the strategies of the first type. The idea is to open an interesting position that will show enough profit to cover several losses. This could be trading using chart patterns, wave analysis, candlestick analysis. You can also add buyers of classic options here.

Stop-Loss is an order of magnitude greater than the expected profit

The third type includes arbitrage strategies, selling volatility. The idea behind such strategies is to generate a constant, close to fixed, income due to statistically stable patterns or extreme price differences. But there is also a downside to the coin - a significant Stop-Loss size. If the system breaks down, the resulting loss can cover all the earned profit at once. It's like a deposit in a dodgy bank - the interest rate is great, but there's also a risk of bankruptcy.

Reflecting on these three groups, I formulated the following postulate: “In an efficient market, the most efficient strategies will show a zero financial result with a pre-determined profit to loss ratio”.

Let's take this postulate apart piece by piece. What does efficient market mean? It is a stock market where most participants instantly receive information about the assets in question and immediately decide to place, cancel or modify their order. In other words, in such a market, there is no lag between the appearance of information and the reaction to it. It should be said that thanks to the development of telecommunications and information technologies, modern stock markets have significantly improved their efficiency and continue to do so.

What is an effective strategy? This is a strategy that does not bring losses.

Profit to loss ratio is the result of profitable trades divided by the result of losing trades in the chosen strategy, considering commissions.

So, according to the postulate, one can know in advance what this ratio will be for the most effective strategy in an effective market. In this case, the financial result for any such strategy will be zero.

The formula for calculating the profit to loss ratio according to the postulate:

Profit : Loss ratio = %L / (100% - %L)

Where %L is the percentage of losing trades in the strategy.

Below is a graph of the different ratios of the most efficient strategy in an efficient market.



For example, if your strategy has 60% losing trades, then with a profit to loss ratio of 1.5:1, your financial result will be zero. In this example, to start making money, you need to either reduce the percentage of losing trades (<60%) with a ratio of 1.5:1, or increase the ratio (>1.5), while maintaining the percentage of losing trades (60%). With such improvements, your point will be below the orange line - this is the inefficient market space. In this zone, it is not about your strategy becoming more efficient, you have simply found inefficiencies in the market itself.



Any point above the efficient market line is an inefficient strategy. It is the opposite of an effective strategy, meaning it results in an overall loss. Moreover, an inefficient strategy in an efficient market makes the market itself inefficient, which creates profitable opportunities for efficient strategies in an inefficient market. It sounds complicated, but these words contain an important meaning - if someone loses, then someone will definitely find.



Thus, there is an efficient market line, a zone of efficient strategies in an inefficient market, and a zone of inefficient strategies. In reality, if we mark a point on this chart at a certain time interval, we will get rather a cloud of points, which can be located anywhere and, for example, cross the efficient market line and both zones at the same time. This is due to the constant changes that occur in the market. It is an entity that evolves together with all participants. What was effective suddenly becomes ineffective and vice versa.



For this reason, I formulated another postulate: “Any market participant strives for the effectiveness of his strategy, and the market strives for its own effectiveness, and when this is achieved, the financial result of the strategy will become zero”.

In other words, the efficient market line has a strong gravity that, like a magnet, attracts everything that is above and below it. However, I doubt that absolute efficiency will be achieved in the near future. This requires that all market participants have equally fast access to information and respond to it effectively. Moreover, many traders and investors, including myself, have a strong interest in the market being inefficient. Just like we want gravity to be strong enough that we don't fly off into space from our couches, but gentle enough that we can visit the refrigerator. This limits or delays the transfer of information to each other.

Returning to the topic of Stop-Loss, one should pay attention to another pattern that follows from the postulates of market efficiency. Below, on the graph (red line), you can see how much the loss to profit ratio changes depending on the percentage of losing trades in the strategy.



For me, the values located on the red line are the mathematical expectation associated with the size of the loss in an effective strategy in an effective market. In other words, those who have a small percentage of losing trades in their strategy should be on guard. The potential loss in such strategies can be several times higher than the accumulated profit. In the case of strategies with a high percentage of losing trades, most of the risk has already been realized, so the potential loss relative to the profit is small.

As for my attitude towards Stop-Loss, I do not use it in my stock market investing strategy. That is, I don’t know in advance at what price I will close the position. This is because I treat buying shares as participating in a business. I cannot accept that when crazy Mr. Market knocks on my door and offers a strange price, I will immediately sell him my shares. Rather, I would ask myself, “How efficient is the market right now and should I buy more shares at this price?” My decision to sell should be motivated not only by the price but also by the fundamental reasons for the decline.

For me, the main criterion for closing a position is the company's profitability - a metric that is the same for everyone who looks at it. If a business stops being profitable, that's a red flag. In this case, the time the company has been in a loss-making state and the size of the losses are considered. Even a great company can have a bad quarter for one reason or another.

In my opinion, the main work with risks should take place before the company gets into the portfolio, and not after the position is opened. Often it doesn't even involve fundamental business analysis. Here are four things I'm talking about:

- Diversification. Distribution of investments among many companies.
- Gradually gaining position. Buying stocks within a range of prices, rather than at one desired price.
- Prioritization of sectors. For me, sectors of stable consumer demand always have a higher priority than others.
- No leverage.

I propose to examine the last point separately. The thing is that the broker who lends you money is absolutely right to be afraid that you won’t pay it back. For this reason, each time he calculates how much his loan is secured by your money and the current value of the shares (that is, the value that is currently on the market). Once this collateral is not enough, you will receive a so-called margin call. This is a requirement to fund an account to secure a loan. If you fail to do this, part of your position will be forcibly closed. Unfortunately, no one will listen to the excuse that this company is making a profit and the market is insane. The broker will simply give you a Stop-Loss. Therefore, leverage, by its definition, cannot be used in my investment strategy.

In conclusion of this article, I would like to say that the market, as a social phenomenon, contains a great paradox. On the one hand, we have a natural desire for it to be ineffective, on the other hand, we are all working on its effectiveness. It turns out that the income we take from the market is payment for this work. At the same time, our loss can be represented as the salary that we personally pay to other market participants for their efficiency. I don't know about you, but this understanding seems beautiful to me.