Mobile finance app image

How professionals manage risk

Ahh … risk reward … a hotly debated topic among traders.

Most have an opinion on the best risk reward ratios …

… along with thoughts on what’s wrong with other trader’s ideas on the subject.

But, if you’re scratching your head and wondering what all the fuss is about, here’s a quick 101 on what risk-reward ratios are …

Risk is how much you would expect to lose if your trade is unsuccessful; reward is how much you expect to gain if your trade is successful. So, a risk-reward ratio is one of these numbers set against the other.

If you’re risking £1 to make £2, then your risk-reward ratio is 2:1. That’s £2 profit for every £1 loss.

If you’re risking £50 to make £150, then your risk-reward ratio is 3:1.

To be profitable, your risk-reward ratio needs to be balanced against how many trades you actually win, and how many you lose. (You can find more background on risk-reward here.)

Over-simplifying the Risk Reward Ratio

The simplistic way to look at risk-reward is to think that risk is bad … reward is good … therefore an RRR with a big reward and a small risk is what we want. We can think of the risk as a “payment” for our potential reward. The idea of paying as little as possible is attractive – we all love a bargain!

But, as any shopper or consumer knows … if you buy cheap, you’re unlikely to get quality.

So, to follow that analogy through, if we take a small risk (i.e. we pay cheap), what does that say about the rewards we can expect?

Just as what you pay affects what you get … so, risk and reward are inextricably linked.

What is risk?

Risk is all about the unpredictable. If we toss a coin, you could get heads, you could get tails. The only way to remove that uncertainty is to not toss the coin at all.

Likewise, if we enter the market, we could win, we could lose. If you want a risk-free solution, then trading isn’t for you.

It’s the same unpredictability that could bring you untold riches or unwanted losses. That unpredictability is as much our friend as it is our enemy.

So, risk and reward can’t be put into separate boxes … despite what much trading advice will tell you.

The received wisdom

Did I mention before that I’m not a fan of the ‘received wisdom’ on risk-reward ratios?

There’s a lot of ‘helpful’ advice out there for traders about using a risk-reward ratio of at least 2:1 (i.e. your rewards must be at least double your risk). This is touted as the worst-case-scenario trade you’d be entering, while you should ideally be hunting down 3:1 … 4:1 … offerings.

It sounds great doesn’t it? Only take a tiny risk, for a large potential reward?

But, as we’ve seen, risk is tied up to reward.

We can’t just enter a trade, and set up parameters for a high reward, low risk … and expect it to come good.

I know that many of us were first lured into the trading game by the idea of scalping profits. These are strategies in which we risk just a few pounds with a super-tight stop loss, hoping to make much bigger profits with a wider profit target. You might be trading with a 4-point stop, and a stake of £2; combined with a profit target of 10 points. We tell ourselves that we can’t lose! Even if we only get it right 50% of the time, we’ll soon be rich!

But tight stops and wide profit targets are not the silver bullet to profitability. And anyone who’s tried these kinds of systems will tend to find their stops hit a lot more than 50% of the time (while paying their broker a hefty share of every trade in spread charges!)

At the other end of the extreme, if your stop distance is wide enough, you’ll never get stopped out!

In fact, tests have shown that trading without a stop loss at all will, ultimately, be more profitable than trading with one. However, you’d need unfeasibly deep pockets and plenty of patience to trade this way (I don’t recommend it!)

No matter where you put a stop, it will hurt performance. And the tighter that stop, the more it’ll hurt.

Based on that knowledge, the ultimate, can’t-lose trading strategy would look like this …

  • unlimited funds
  • no stop level
  • take profits as soon as possible

Yes, that really is as infallible as you can get for a trading system.

There’s an obvious problem, of course … because I expect that you, like me, aren’t able to access unlimited funds to get through the rough patches!

But if you look at this as the ‘ideal’ it’s hard to see how we’ve ended up with so many traders preaching about 2:1 risk-reward ratios.

So, now let’s look at what a professional risk manager advises we do …

Martin Carter, the creator of Diff Code Global and former risk manager, sets his stop distances at 2x his profit target.

This gives him an initial RRR of 1:2. The exact flip-side of what many ‘trading gurus’ tell you you should be doing.

You’ll notice that I say ‘initial RRR’ – because by the time his trades are closed, which sometimes is signaled before a stop or target is hit, this ratio is significantly tightened, with risk being closer to 1.5x reward. But, even then, it’s a long way from the ‘received wisdom’.

The reason this works (and it does – phenomenally well) is because these aren’t stops that are designed to be hit. They are designed to be well out of the way, so that around 70% of trades will be winners.

And, of course, Martin’s Diff Code methods have extra security built into them, with his use of hedged markets.

So, what’s the RIGHT RRR?

The trick with Risk-reward ratios is to look objectively at them. Have they been arbitrarily set to look good and match expectations?

Or are they about seriously managing risk, and maximizing rewards?

And, even more importantly, do they work?

To enjoy more content and get it faster

Save

Save

6 comments

  • I have invariably seen reward displayed before risk, which is why I, and the traders I follow, call it reward/risk.

  • A

    I agree that what we should do is show the risk first and the reward second and if you are a member of my Heikin Ashi Mountain system this is actually what I do.

    So a 2:1 would be £100 risked to make £50 profit and a 1:2 is £50 risked to make £100.

    However, over the years, more often than not the reward has been displayed before the risk, even though we say Risk/Reward so it’s one of those things you need to double check.

    Regards,

    Mark

  • Hi Mark,
    I realise that this is digressing a little from the main subject, but I do think the confusion over what “risk/reward” actually means should be addressed, as the incorrect interpretation of it could prove expensive.
    I have always considered a risk/reward of, say, 2:1 to mean a risk of two to a reward of one – any other meaning would seem counter-intuitive. For confirmation I tried googling for a definition, and Investopedia came up with this:
    “What is a ‘Risk/Reward Ratio’
    Many investors use a risk/reward ratio to compare the expected returns of an investment to the amount of risk undertaken to capture these returns. This ratio is calculated mathematically by dividing the amount the trader stands to lose if the price moves in the unexpected direction (the risk) by the amount of profit the trader expects to have made when the position is closed (the reward).
    BREAKING DOWN ‘Risk/Reward Ratio’
    Consider this example. A trader purchases 100 shares of XYZ Company at $20 and places a stop-loss order at $15 to ensure that losses will not exceed $500. Also assume that this trader believes that the price of XYZ will reach $30 in the next few months. In this case, the trader is willing to risk $5 per share to make an expected return $10 per share after closing the position. Since the trader stands to make double the amount that she has risked, she would be said to have a 1:2 risk/reward ratio on that particular trade.”

    So Investopedia agrees with Geoff and me, I thought, but seeking further confirmation, Investopedia also came up with this:

    “Risk Vs. Reward
    ……..If somebody you marginally trust asks for a $50 loan and offers to pay you $60 in two weeks, it might not be worth the risk, but what if they offered to pay you $100? The risk of losing $50 for the chance to make $100 might be appealing.
    That’s a 2:1 risk/reward, which is a ratio where a lot professional investors start to get interested. A 2:1 ratio allows the investor to double their money. If that person offered you $150, then the ratio goes to 3:1.”

    Which would seem to agree with Mark’s interpretation!
    So if Investopedia can so readily directly contradict itself, what chance have I got of understanding what risk/reward really means?
    I also tried Babypips, and they talk of Reward/Risk most of the time, with occasional use of Risk/Reward just to confuse things.

    Regards
    Tony

  • A

    Thanks for the feedback Geoff and Tony. It’s one of those bizarre back-to-front conventions! A 3:2 risk-reward ratio is reward=3 and risk=2. I agree that it would be simpler if we spoke about reward-to-risk ratios. So much lingo seems to be more about confusing the outsider than actually making anything clearer!

  • Hi Mark,

    I have to say I totally agree with Geoff when he picks you up on your use of a ” Risk:Reward of 2:1 means you’re risking £1 to make £2″. It’s simply GOT to be the other way round! A Risk:Reward of 2:1 means you’re risking £2 to make £1, otherwise it would have to be called “Reward:Risk”.
    Perhaps we should stick to a R:R of 1:1, then there would be no chance of misunderstanding!

    Best wishes
    Tony

  • An interesting subject Mark. I’ve seen all sides of the argument more than once. My current feeling is for more reward per unit of risk, otherwise the losers outstrip the winners on an individual basis.

    Can I pick you up on one point. You say, for example: If you’re risking £1 to make £2, then your risk-reward ratio is 2:1. This confused me totally when I started trading, mainly because it is blatantly untrue. You/we should be saying: If you’re risking £1 to make £2, then your reward-risk ratio is 2:1.

    Regards

Leave your comment

JOIN US ...

Get full access to members-only resources, plus my weekly email updates ...

I will NEVER share your details for marketing purposes. Privacy policy

TradeNationPromotion

Strategies I'm Using