🚨I’ll be live at 3:30 p.m. ET with Nate🚨
We’ll discuss how real this rally is today, how to trade it, preparing for the new Fed Chair’s first FOMC meeting and more [tap to join us for Closing Playbook]!
There is a dangerous assumption floating around about day trading — the idea that executing 10 to 15 trades per day accelerates your path to statistical profitability.
It sounds reasonable. More trades means your edge should reveal itself faster because of the Law of Large Numbers — the principle that your actual results move closer to their expected probability as the number of trials increases. But that principle only works when each trial is truly independent.
But that’s not how this works in practice. Unlike a casino that processes millions of bets per day and naturally realizes its small edge, most traders take only a handful of trades.
That means you do not get the smoothing effect the math promises. You have to repeat across weeks and months, and in that repetition process you will eat dirt several times before your expected value ever shows up.
The casino wins daily because the volume forces the statistics to materialize. We as retail traders do not get that luxury.
On top of that, even if you execute perfectly and your system gives you that many pure signals, there are critical issues — and they all revolve around correlation, the silent killer of what you think is diversification.
The Correlation You Can See
If your system alerts you on 10 different stocks in a single day, the first question you should ask is how correlated those stocks are. If they’re highly correlated, you haven’t diversified anything — you’ve just 10x’d one single bet.
You might think you’re spreading risk across multiple positions but you’re really stacking the same trade over and over.
Even if the symbols look uncorrelated, market conditions change over time. You might have a streak of wins in one environment then a streak of losses in another. This shift alone can suddenly synchronize instruments that normally behave independently.
The Correlation You Cannot See Until It Is Too Late
Even if your 10 trades are on completely different stocks, they’re still correlated with today’s market conditions. A single event — a tweet from the president, a news burst or sentiment shock — can fuse everything together instantly.
If your system gave you puts across multiple names that appeared uncorrelated at the moment of entry, that can turn into one massive short bet. If the market is trending higher and it’s a green day, you’re going to be in trouble.
And this is where many traders fall into an even deeper trap: tweaking their system midstream. Jumping between methods, changing filters after a few losses or assuming that a 70% win rate means the next trade has a 70% chance of winning destroys the foundation the Law of Large Numbers relies on.
Consistency beats improvisation, especially when sample sizes are small.
There’s also the brutal reality of drawdowns. If three losing trades can knock you out of the game, taking more trades only accelerates the risk of ruin. You need enough capital and enough emotional bandwidth to survive the inevitable losing streaks long enough for your edge to play out.
Institutions and casinos can rely on statistics because their volume forces the numbers to behave. Retail traders cannot count on that. Before you convince yourself that more trades equals faster edge realization, make sure you’re not multiplying your exposure to the same underlying bet — or setting yourself up for a drawdown you cannot survive.
Kane Shieh
Kane Shieh Trading
Follow along and join the conversation for real-time analysis, trade ideas, market insights and more!
Important Note: No one from The TradingPub team or Kane Shieh Trading will ever contact you directly on Telegram.
*This is for informational and educational purposes only. There is inherent risk in trading, so trade at your own risk.Â
P.S. Breaking News From The TradingPub!
I recently showed Roger Scott a “mistake” in the options market that gives you and me an insane edge…
He was so spooked, he looked like he had just seen a ghost!
