Tin tức & phân tích thị trường

The basics: We are in the final weeks of the 2024 US presidential election. But what exactly are US citizens voting for and when will it actually take place? A US election always takes place on the first Tuesday of November – that means that for this year Tuesday, 5 November 2024, is when the election will be held, with the swearing of the next president of the United States of America taking place in the first week of January 2025 and will serve a 4-year term with the next election due in November 2028 for a swearing in in January 2029.

The electoral mechanics of a US election The President is not the candidate that gains the highest number of votes - known as the popular vote, just ask Hilary Cliton or Al Gore about this fact. The President is the candidate who wins the most ‘Electoral Colleges’. Each of the 50 US states and territories has a certain amount of electoral college votes allocated to it.

These votes are partly based on population densities and partly based on historical norms. The total number of electoral colleges across the country is 538 and thus the winner needs to gain 270 or more electoral college votes to win the Oval Office. Here is ‘Electoral College Map’ – each one of the numbers in each State is how many electoral college votes that State is allocated.

This is where it gets interesting, all but two states have a winner takes all rule. So even if the voting in Pennsylvania for example was 49.9% to 50.1% - the higher candidate would take all 19 votes for that State. There are two States that have a ‘split’ these being Maine and Nebraska.

As you can see in the map, these States have a split colour, in these two States some of the Electoral College votes can go to the lower voted candidate. However if there is a majority win all seats will go to the winner. These two have influenced elections in the past, however they are not expected to be in play this election.

The map currently shows five different scenarios. Those States that are solid towards one party or the other. Such as California (Democrats), and Texas (Republican).

Those States that are leaning towards one part of the other such as Colorado (Democrats) and Florida (Republican). Then there are those States that are the “Keys” to each election, the States that flip known as Swing States or battleground States. These have changed slightly over the years.

For example, the State of Ohio used to be known as the keystone State as every election up until 2012 which every party candidate Ohio voted for, won the oval office. It has now changed and is a lock for the Republican party. On the flipside States like Arizona and Nevada used to be locks for the Republican party; now they are swing States.

In 2024 there are 7 Swing States we see as the Keys to the election with one being the Keystone. They are: Wisconsin, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, Arizona, Nevada and the Keystone State of Pennsylvania. As things stand – Harris has solid and leaning State votes of 240, Trump has solid and leaning State votes of 225.

The seven Swing states have 93 so a combination of these will be needed for the candidate to cross the magical 270 mark. The Candidates Running as the Republican Party nominee is former president Donald Trump. He smashed his rivals in the primaries with a whopping majority and has been the presumptive nominee really since losing the 2020 election.

His vice-presidential running mate is Ohio senator JD Vance and is one of the youngest VP candidates in decades. Running as the Democrat nominee is current Vice-President Kamala Harris. Her road to the nominee has been unconventional as she joined the race after President Joe Biden dropped out and with no other Democrats standing against her no primaries were conducted.

Her vice-presidential running mate is Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, one of the oldest VP choices in decades although not as old as Trump himself. The Capitol The Oval Office is not the only thing up for grab on November 5, and although all of the attention will be on who wins the presidency. Congress which consists of both the House of Representatives and Senate will be up for grabs.

In the House of Representatives, all 435 seats are up for election. Currently the House is controlled by the Republicans, so a Trump Presidency with a Republican House would mean laws and spending directions would be easier to pass if the House status quo remained. But history shows that the house tends to swing every two years and having won the house in the Midterms the Republicans would be nervous of history repeating.

In the Senate 34 seats are being contested. There are 100 seats in the Senate rotating every 6 years. The Democrats currently control the Senate 51 seat to 49 and it's likely to also be hotly contested come November 5 and like the House anything is possible.

Trading the Day We think 2024 is likely to be similar to 2020 where the true result wasn’t known for several days. As the polls show 2024 is going to be one of the closest elections since WWII all votes will need to be counted before the winner is declared. We will be closely watching the seven Swing States for any signs one candidate is doing better than the other as this may provide a clearer picture of just how everything could play out.

But with postal votes and early voting slips in places like Michigan and Pennsylvania being counted last on the day they are likely to drag out the timeframes. We will also be watching key updates such as exit polls. The likes of Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Georgia have previously hit the newswire around 11am AEDT.

In 2016 these States moved in Trump’s favour and famously saw the betting agencies wiping their markets for several minutes before returning with Trump a favourite over Clinton having been outside odds all campaign. At around 2pm AEDT Midwest Central States will start to declare keep these times in your diaries. Watch for movements in DXY.

The dollar basket in the 2016 election was volatile as a Trump presidency was seen as an ‘unknown’ however very quickly after the event it was bid up as his policies and market friendly mantra lead to strong inflows. As he is a “known known” in 2024 this may not be as big a mover as 2016. However, it’s likely the USD will shift higher any perceived good ‘Trump news’.

Be aware of false dawns. All elections have false dawns with pre-emptive calls, biased interpretations, early ballot boxes showing big swings to one candidate due to small vote numbers. The list is long.

These are trader traps, remember the election will not be over inside the Australian business day as West Coast States only close as we finish the day. Take your time to do your research with reputable news outlets tuned in to players like Bloomberg, Politico, CNBC, 538.com and Silver Bullet. International media stations like the BBC and our own ABC are likely to be impartial and news only focused.

Over the coming weeks leading into the November 5 election, we will be here to give you as much information as we can as to what is moving markets from the US election 2024 with this as our dedicated landing page. (link or whatever you guys want). So welcome to trading the US Presidential Election with GO Markets.

Over the past 3 months Nvidia has moved through ranges that some stocks don’t do in years, in some cases decades. Having lost over 35 per cent in the June to August sell off, it quickly bounced over 40 per cent in the preceding 20 days once it hit its August low as we build positions ahead of its results. These results delivered Nvidia style numbers with three figure growth on the sales, net profit and earnings lines but this did not appease the market, seeing it fall 22 per cent in a little over 8 days.

Which brings us to now – a new 16 per cent drive as Nivida reports it’s struggling to meet demands and that the AI revolution is translating faster than even it expected. This got us thinking – Where are we right “Now” in the AU players? Thus, it’s time to dive into the drivers for the Nvidia and Co.

AI players. Supersonic As mentioned, Nvidia’s results have been astonishing – and it still has time to do a US$50 billion buyback. It collected the award for becoming the world’s largest company in the shortest timeframe in the post-WWII era, think about that for one second – that’s faster than Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Google, Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, TV players of the 60s and 70s.

So the question is how does it keep its speed and trajectory? Well that comes from what some are calling the ‘supersonic’ scalers. These are the players like Google, Amazon, Meta and Microsoft that are the users and providers of the AI revolution.

These are the players that have spent hundreds billions thus far on the third digital revolution. Let us once again put that into perspective, the amount of spending is (inflation adjusted) the same as what was spent during the 1960’s on mainframe computing and the 1990’s distribution of fibre-optics. So we have now seen that level of spending in AI the next step is ‘usage’ and that is the inflection point we find ourselves at.

Currently AI is mainly used to train foundational models and chatbots – which is fine but not long-term financially stable. It needs to move into things like productions – that is producing models for corporate clients that forecast, streamline and increase productivity. This is the ‘Grail’ This immediately raises the bigger question for now – can this Grail be achieved?

The Voices To answer that – let us present some arguments from some of AI’s largest “Voices” On the AI potential and the possibility of a profound and rapid technological revolution, Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has claimed that AI represents the "biggest, best, and most important of all technology revolutions," and predicts that AI will become increasingly integrated into all aspects of life. This reflects a belief in AI's far-reaching influence over time. The never subtle McKinsey and Co. has projected that generative AI could eventually contribute up to $8 trillion to the global economy annually.

This figure underscores the massive economic potential of AI. The huge caveat: McKinsey's predictions are never real-world tested and inevitably fall flat in the market. This kind of money is what makes AI so attractive to players in Venture Capital.

For the VC watchers out there the one that is catching everyone’s attention is VC accelerator Y Combinator which is fully embracing the technology. Just to put Y Combinator into context, according to Jared Heyman’s Rebel Fund, if anyone had invested in every Y Combinator deal since 2005 (which would have been impossible just to let you know), the average annual return would have been 176%, even after accounting for dilution. Furthermore to the VC story - AI has accounted for over 40 per cent of new unicorns (startups valued at $1 billion or more) in the first half of 2024, and 60 per cent of the increase in VC-backed valuations.

So far in 2024, U.S. unicorn valuations have grown by $162 billion, largely driven by AI’s rapid expansion, according to Pitchbook data. So the Voices certainly believe it can be achieved. But is this a good thing?

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly AI is advancing at such a rapid pace that existing performance benchmarks, such as reading comprehension, image classification and advanced maths, are becoming outdated, necessitating the creation of new standards. This reflects the fast-moving nature of AI progress. For example, look at the success of AlphaFold, an AI-driven algorithm that accurately predicts protein structures.

Some see this as one of the most important achievements in AI’s short history and underscores AI’s transformative impact on science, particularly in fields like biology and healthcare. This is the Good. Then there is the 165-page paper titled "Situational Awareness" by Aschenbrenner which has predicted that by 2030, AI will achieve superintelligence and create a $1 trillion industry.

Also, a positive, but will consume 20 per cent of the U.S. power supply. These incredible predictions emphasise the enormous scale of AI and the impact it will have on industry, infrastructure and people. The latest Google study found that generative AI could significantly improve workforce productivity.

The study suggests that roughly 80 per cent of jobs could see at least 10 per cent of tasks completed twice as fast due to AI, which has implications for industries such as call centres, coding, and professional writing. This highlights AI's capacity to streamline tasks and enhance efficiency across various fields. However it also raises the massive concern around job security, job satisfaction and the socio-economic divide as the majority of those affected by AI ‘productivity’ are in mid to low scales.

Then we come to Elon Musk’s new AI startup, xAI, which raised $6 billion at a valuation of $24 billion this year. The company is planning to build the world’s largest supercomputer in Tennessee to support AI training and inference. This all sounds economically and financially exciting but it has a darker side.

These are the kinds of AI ventures that have seen ‘deep-fake’ creations. For example Musk himself shared a deep-fake video of Vice President Kamala Harris. This is the ugly side of AI and reflects the broader cultural and ethical issues surrounding AI-generated content.

Furthermore – we should always be forecasting both the good and the bad for investment opportunities. These issues are already attracting regulations and compliance responses. How impactful will these be?

And will it halt the AI driven share price appreciation? It is a very real and present issue. Where does this leave us?

The share price future of Nvidia and Co is clearly dependent on the longer-term achievement of the AI revolution. As shown, the supersonic players in technology and venture capital are betting big on AI, with predictions that it will reshape the global economy, industries, and even basic societal structures. However, there is still uncertainty about the exact timeline for these changes and how accurately the market is pricing in AI's potential.

The AI ecosystem is moving at breakneck speed, with new developments outpacing benchmarks and productivity gains reshaping jobs, but whether all these projections that range from trillion-dollar economies to superintelligence materialises remains to be seen. Thus – for now – Nvidia and Co’s recent roller-coaster trading looks set to continue.

We will do a deep dive into how to trade the upcoming US Federal Reserve meeting on Wednesday but for now we need to address the Fed and others from an Australian traders perspective as it is one of 3 plays we need to be mindful of. 1. Hard or Soft – Can we stick the landing? All central banks across the developed world are doing summersaults, with a one and half twist to land their respective economies with a soft landing.

And this is increasingly seeing them align towards coordinated easing – barring the RBA more on that later. The debate between soft and hard landings in the global economy is accelerating. For example, traders have begun to notice that there is a switch in trade from the previously held trade of bad economic data that was often seen as good for risk assets, as it increased the likelihood of monetary easing.

To the now, poor data is also being traded as negative for risk, reflecting growing fears that economic weakness could be deeper and more prolonged than anticipated. We have highlighted this point through the US employment data and the slowing numbers in GDP. Equity markets clearly believe they will stick the landing with record all -time high trading in the DOW, S&P and most other major bourses including the ASX 200.

But they have yet to fully account for the potential downside risks of a hard landing scenario. In fact, equities have a bigger divergence that could spell trouble if central banks get it wrong as it is really only a small group of high-performing sectors or stocks that are driving gains, while many others lag. This narrow leadership, combined with elevated valuations, raises concerns about the market's vulnerability should the hard landing scenario materialise.

This brings us to Thursday’s Federal Reserve meeting – it will cut the expectations for a 25-basis point cut at the upcoming September meeting sits at 42 percent the bigger 50-basis point cut sits at 62 per cent. This has led to increased debate around market positioning and sector rotation. The Fed’s recent communications have largely endorsed the beginning of an easing cycle at a slow pace.

But that hasn’t stopped traders putting in an upward repricing - the bull steepening of the yield curve, particularly led by short-term yields, as markets anticipate rate cuts. This steepening trend, which began in earnest in late June, is significant because it reflects a growing belief that the most acute phase of the economic slowdown, and the associated recession risk, may be over. Take the US 2-year and 10-year yield curve which has been inverted.

Traditionally, an inverted yield curve signals a looming recession, but the recent return to a more normal curve suggests that the period of waiting for a slowdown and/or recession may have passed, and markets are now pricing in the economic consequences of monetary easing. Historically, during periods of bull steepening, certain defensive sectors such as Healthcare, Utilities, Banks, and Staples have outperformed, as investors shift towards sectors that offer stability and reliability in times of economic uncertainty, but that hasn’t happened – suggesting a gap is forming. Looking closer to home - the typical sectoral performance associated with yield curve steepening has only partially played out.

Just have a look at the Tech sector, it has significantly outperformed this year, a divergence from its usual underperformance during such periods. This divergence is largely due to the impressive growth execution couple that with their larger capitalisations in this cycle has made them a substitute for the quality growth traditionally offered by Healthcare. Looking forward, should the yield curve move from bull steepening to bull flattening (where the long end of the curve leads the decline), leading sectors are expected to shift.

In a bull flattening trade, sectors such as Real Estate and Materials typically emerge as leaders, creating the potential for broader equity market gains. This scenario is currently the most plausible case for broadening equity returns and driving further upside in the market index. 2. Commodities: Mind the thud While financial markets are pricing in the possibility of a soft landing, commodity markets are facing a much more severe test of the hard landing so hard it might be considered a ‘thud’.

The cost curves for key Aussie commodities, such as Iron Ore and Metallurgical Coal, are being battered by soft global demand and oversupply dynamics particularly out of China. These cost curves are being tested as commodity prices struggle to find support amid concerns over an economic slowdown. This is certainly the scenario BHP and Rio are seeing and have factored this into their forward guidance numbers.

Then we look at global commodities - oil inventories have reached levels typically associated with recessions, further signalling the market's concern over weakening demand and OPEC’s recent communiques suggesting it will halt its planned increases in output. We also have a scenario not seen in the modern era, a China story that isn’t working. China’s economic policies are under intense scrutiny, and the country’s growth trajectory will significantly impact global demand for key commodities in the coming year.

The negative price signals in the commodities space stand in sharp contrast to the more optimistic outlook being priced into equity markets. While equities suggest a soft landing is still the base case, commodities are flashing red with alarm as price weakness implying deeper demand concerns and thus issues around growth. This divergence raises the risk of a sharper reversal in positioning, particularly in resource-linked equities.

The caveat to this is the ongoing capital constraints on supply, combined with the potential easing of demand concerns as monetary policy softens, could set the stage for a recovery in certain commodity markets. If this was to play out, broad exposure to large-cap Energy stocks, particularly in Oil and Uranium, as well as to large-cap diversified Materials and Gold could be beneficial, as these sectors are well-positioned to benefit from any eventual recovery in global demand. 3. RBA’s Easing Path – When not If The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) continues to chart its own path.

It’s cautious approach that prioritises inflation risks has been the core principle of RBA Governor Michele Bullock. And despite mounting expectations for a faster easing cycle, the RBA has so far resisted pressure to cut rates aggressively stating that controlling inflation is far more important than short term growth concerns. Investors are divided on how quickly the RBA will move to ease policy.

While the central bank has maintained a patient stance, market expectations are pricing in a full rate cut by February. The consensus view is that the RBA will ultimately follow the lead of other central banks and cut rates sooner than currently forecast, with some expecting the easing cycle to begin well before the RBA’s projected May 2025 timeline. But whenever it starts – all are of the same view, once they start it will signal a solid period of cuts.

The consensus is that come December 2025 – the cash rate will be 3 percent not the current 4.35 per cent we have. The RBA’s decision-making will come down to the economic landing all are facing. Should a hard landing materialise, the RBA may be forced to cut rates faster to support the domestic economy.

However, if a soft landing prevails, there is every incentive for the RBA to remain behind its global peers in cutting rates. This approach (which is the current one taken by the RBA) would help support the AUD. It would also help in reducing the inflationary pressures from imported goods, while also allowing the labour market to cool and consumption to weaken, preventing a rapid reacceleration of inflation once policy is eased.

For equity markets, the RBA’s cautious easing profile suggests a prolonged period of below-trend growth. This would delay the cyclical uplift in earnings that is needed to justify current market valuations. As a result, it can explain why the ASX keeps hitting resistance at around 8100 points, there is no catalyst to push it higher.

While the easing cycle will eventually provide a tailwind for equity valuations, the current environment of slow growth and cautious monetary policy implies that significant market gains are unlikely until later in the cycle.

In this article, we take an in-depth look at the concept of strength of signal and its potential role in improving trading outcomes. Traders are constantly seeking ways to enhance their results consistently, and the idea of evaluating the strength of a trading signal may provide a pathway toward greater reliability and performance when applied to trading systems across multiple timeframes and instruments. By delving into this concept, we will explore not only what strength of signal means but also the key factors involved in its practical application in decision-making and trade execution.

Why Could Strength of Signal Be Important for Traders? Definition: Strength of signal refers to the degree of confidence and reliability a particular trading signal provides regarding anticipated market movements. It measures the quality and trustworthiness of a trading setup, aiming to increase the likelihood of success by filtering out weaker signals and focusing on higher-probability opportunities.

The idea of strength of signal is most commonly applied to trade entries, where traders seek to increase their chances of entering the market at an optimal point. This can lead to better overall performance by avoiding premature or low-confidence entries that could result in losing trades. However, strength of signal also holds significance in trade exits.

For instance, a strong signal at the entry point may weaken over time, indicating a lack of continuation in the trend. This change in signal strength could provide the trader with an early warning to exit the trade before a reversal occurs. At its most basic application, strength of signal may help traders decide whether to enter a trade.

However, its implications are far-reaching, influencing other critical aspects of trading such as: Position sizing: When the signal is stronger, a trader may feel more confident about increasing their position size. A weak signal, on the other hand, may prompt the trader to either reduce their position size or avoid entering the trade entirely. Accumulating positions: If a trader has already entered a trade and the strength of the signal improves, they might decide to add to the existing position.

This practice, known as scaling in, can maximize gains during favourable market conditions. Exit decisions: Weakening signal strength can serve as a warning sign to exit a position. If a trade was initially based on a strong signal but the factors driving that signal begin to diminish, it could indicate a shift in market sentiment, prompting the trader to take profits or cut losses.

Components of Strength of Signal The strength of a signal can be broken down into three broad categories: price action, trading volume, and the confluence of technical indicators. Each of these components contributes in its own way to the overall reliability of the trading signal. a. Price Action Price action is the cornerstone of technical analysis and is considered the most important component when assessing the strength of a signal.

This is because price action reflects real-time market sentiment and behaviour. Candle structure: The open, high, low, and close (OHLC) of a candlestick offers vital clues about the current battle between buyers and sellers. For example, long wicks might indicate rejection of certain price levels, while a series of bullish or bearish candles can point to the start of a trend.

Patterns and formations: Multiple candlesticks forming patterns (e.g., head and shoulders, triangles, or flags) can provide insight into potential reversals or continuations. Recognizing these patterns can significantly contribute to assessing signal strength. Timeframe comparison: Price action can vary significantly across different timeframes.

A signal that appears strong on a lower timeframe, such as a 5-minute chart, might weaken when compared to the price action on a daily or weekly chart. Evaluating the signal across multiple timeframes helps traders confirm its validity. Key levels: Price action near key levels, such as support and resistance or pivot levels, play a crucial role in signal strength.

The closer the market is to a critical level, the more likely a strong reaction will occur, either a bounce or a break, adding weight to the signal. b. Trading Volume Volume is another critical component of strength of signal, as it represents the number of shares, contracts, or lots being traded at a particular price. Volume provides insight into the level of market participation and the conviction behind price movements.

Volume confirmation: When volume increases in the direction of the price move, it signals strong market participation, adding confidence to the strength of the signal. A price movement without sufficient volume may be viewed with caution, as it could lack the momentum needed for continuation. Volume divergence: Divergence between price and volume can signal a weakening trend.

For instance, if prices are rising but volume is decreasing, it may indicate that the buying interest is waning, and the strength of the signal is diminishing. Volume spikes: Sudden spikes in volume can indicate institutional participation or a major market event. High-volume candles at key levels can often confirm the validity of a breakout or breakdown. c.

Other Indicator Confluence Technical indicators summarize historical price and volume data, and while they are lagging in nature, they are undoubtedly useful in adding an additional layer of confirmation to any signal evaluation. Commonly used indicators: Many traders rely on widely recognized indicators such as moving averages, RSI, MACD, or ATR. These indicators help identify trends, momentum, volatility, and potential reversals.

The alignment of multiple indicators—often referred to as confluence —can significantly strengthen a signal. Categories of indicators: Trend indicators: Tools such as moving averages and parabolic SAR can help traders identify the overall direction of the market. A trade that aligns with the prevailing trend is likely to have a stronger signal.

Momentum indicators: Indicators like RSI and MACD provide insight into the speed of the price movement. A weakening momentum might indicate that a trend is losing steam, reducing the signal’s strength. Volatility indicators: Tools like ATR measure the degree of price fluctuation.

Sudden changes in volatility can affect signal strength, as low volatility periods may precede explosive movements. Mean reversion indicators: Bollinger Bands and similar indicators help traders identify overbought or oversold conditions. Trades taken at the extremes of these indicators can have stronger signals if supported by price action and volume.

The Role of News and Events as an influence on strength of signal evaluation Event risk is a crucial, yet often underestimated, component of signal strength. No matter how strong a technical signal appears, the release of major economic data or geopolitical news can drastically alter market conditions, leading to unexpected price movements. It’s essential for traders to remain aware of scheduled news events, such as central bank meetings or earnings reports, which can cause sudden volatility.

A strong technical signal might be overridden by fundamental factors, so incorporating event risk into the overall assessment of signal strength is a necessary practice. The Case for Weighting and a Strength of Signal Score To make the assessment of signal strength more objective, traders can develop a weighted scoring system. By assigning a value to each component (price action, volume, indicators, etc.), they can generate a Strength of Signal (SOS) score.

This score provides a quantitative measure to guide trading decisions. Weighting components: Not all factors carry equal importance. For instance, price action may be assigned a higher weight than indicator confluence, as it reflects current sentiment.

A possible weighting system could look like this: Sentiment change: 40% Candle structure: 20% Higher timeframe confirmation: 10% Volume: 10% Proximity to key levels: 10% Momentum: 5% Volatility change: 5% Instrument and timeframe differentiation: Different instruments and timeframes may require tailored weighting. For example, the weighting system for a fast-moving 30-minute gold chart might differ significantly from that of a more stable 4-hour AUD/NZD chart. Using a Score to Drive Trading Decisions Once a strength of signal score is established, it can be applied to various aspects of trade management: Entry decisions: A minimum SOS score (e.g., 60) could be required for entering a trade.

This ensures that only high-quality setups are considered. Position sizing: A higher SOS score could justify increasing position size. For example, if the score is above 70, a trader might increase their position by 1.5x the normal size, while a score above 80 might warrant doubling the position.

Exit decisions: A decreasing SOS score (e.g., below 30) might signal the need to exit the trade, helping traders protect profits or minimize losses. Summary The concept of strength of signal offers a structured approach to assessing the quality of trading setups. By incorporating factors like price action, volume, and technical indicators into a weighted system, traders can make more informed decisions, potentially improving both their consistency and performance.

Experimenting with different scoring systems and analysing their impact on your trading strategy is worthwhile investigating further in the reality of your own trading. Over time, a well-developed score can provide valuable insights into when to enter, accumulate, or exit trades based on the changing dynamics of the market.

Introduction to Scaling in Trading Scaling in trading involves adjusting the size of trading positions based on specific criteria or rules. This concept is crucial for both discretionary and automated traders, with the latter group often finding it easier to implement due to the structured, rule-based nature of automated systems. For discretionary traders, scaling introduces flexibility to tailor position sizes to fit current market conditions or account balance.

Scaling strategies can apply to an entire account or to selected strategies, depending on the trader’s goals, approach, and the quality of their data. A well-planned scaling approach can enhance profit potential while managing risk, whereas an ad-hoc or uninformed scaling practice often introduces additional risks without promising substantial rewards. This article outlines critical concepts and principles in developing a robust scaling strategy, helping traders determine a path suited to their trading goals and risk tolerance.

Types of Scaling Approaches The choice of scaling approach is based on factors such as experience, trading objectives, and risk tolerance. Any structured scaling approach generally surpasses none, and selecting one today doesn’t preclude exploring others later. We’ll examine four common approaches to assist you in making an informed decision.

Fixed Lot Size Scaling Fixed Lot Size Scaling involves trading a consistent lot size for each position, regardless of changes in account balance or market conditions. This approach is straightforward and accessible, especially for beginners who might not be ready to adapt position sizes actively. However, fixed lot size scaling can be restrictive; it does not account for changes in account value or market dynamics, limiting the ability to manage risk effectively during volatile market periods.

Example in Automated Trading Fixed lot size scaling is especially useful when transitioning a model from backtesting to live trading. For example, if an Expert Advisor (EA) performed well during backtesting with a fixed lot size of 0.1, starting live trading at this minimum volume is prudent. Doing so allows traders to verify live performance against backtest expectations, ensuring the EA’s effectiveness in real market conditions before considering scaling up.

Fixed Fractional Scaling Fixed Fractional Scaling trades a set percentage of the account balance, automatically adjusting position sizes with account growth or shrinkage. This inherently responsive approach aligns with the account’s performance. For example, a trader may risk 1% of the account per trade in leveraged trading, calculating this amount based on the potential loss if a stop-loss is triggered.

This risk tolerance can vary depending on the individual’s strategy and objectives. Benefits and Considerations This approach helps manage risk, especially as the account size fluctuates. However, the varying lot sizes across different instruments and exposures require close monitoring.

For example, in a portfolio with both Forex and commodity trades, the risks associated with each asset type might differ. Traders must consider this variability to ensure their risk exposure remains consistent. Selective Strategy Scaling Selective Strategy Scaling increases position sizes based on the proven success of specific strategies or components within strategies.

This approach accelerates gains, but reaching a critical mass of trades to evaluate performance becomes more challenging due to its selective nature. Example of Strategy-Specific Scaling Consider a trader using multiple strategies: one focusing on trend-following and another on range-bound markets. If the trend-following strategy demonstrates a high win rate and favourable profit factor over time, the trader may selectively scale this strategy’s position sizes.

Meanwhile, the range-bound strategy could be scaled conservatively until it shows consistent performance. Selective scaling like this allows traders to leverage their most reliable strategies for greater potential returns. Variable Scaling (Advanced) Variable Scaling is a sophisticated approach adjusting trade sizes based on market conditions, including price action, trends, signal strength, and volatility.

Advanced traders using variable scaling develop a system to dynamically adjust position sizes based on indicators, providing flexibility to respond to market changes. Example Using Volatility Suppose a trader monitors market volatility through the Average True Range (ATR) indicator. In periods of low ATR (indicating low volatility), the trader might scale down positions to reduce risk.

Conversely, during high volatility, they might increase position sizes to capitalize on larger price swings. This approach requires a deep understanding of technical analysis and specific criteria for guiding scaling decisions. Broad Principles for Effective Scaling Effective scaling relies on well-defined criteria aligned with account size, risk tolerance, and trading performance.

Key metrics include account balance, margin usage, and trade success metrics. Incremental scaling allows traders to gradually adjust position size, thus managing risk as trading volume increases. A structured scaling plan ensures scaling decisions align with the trader’s goals and risk management rules, avoiding emotional, unplanned adjustments.

Optimal Conditions for Scaling (“The When”) Scaling should be guided by specific performance metrics that assess result reliability. Key indicators include: Win Rate: Consistency in win rate over time is crucial. A stable win rate suggests that the strategy performs well across various market conditions.

Profit Factor: A ratio of gross profit to gross loss. Generally, a profit factor above 1.5 indicates more profitable trades than losses. Drawdown: The peak-to-trough decline in account balance.

Lower drawdown suggests more stability, supporting the case for scaling. When combined with net profit and worked out as a ratio, with automated trading we would expect a Net profit to drawdown ration of at least 8:1 Risk-Reward Ratio: A higher ratio shows that profit potential outweighs losses, making the strategy more viable for scaling. Sharpe Ratio: This risk-adjusted return measure indicates better performance relative to risk.

For instance, if a trader maintains a high win rate, profit factor, and low drawdown, they might consider scaling up. However, if metrics vary significantly, scaling should be approached cautiously. Determining How to Scale The degree to which you scale is a crucial component of your plan.

Scaling is often done incrementally, such as moving from a starting lot size of 0.1 to 0.3, 0.5, and so on, based on the strength of results. For instance, a trader may scale up by 0.1 lot for each 5% account growth, provided performance metrics remain stable. It’s essential to clearly define this scaling plan before implementation, follow it precisely, and review it over time to ensure it meets trading objectives.

Psychology and Challenges of Scaling Scaling involves a psychological shift, as traders manage larger positions with increased potential profit and loss. Traders often encounter procrastination, impatience, or anxiety, especially when adjusting to larger numbers. Managing Psychological Challenges To illustrate this principle in an example, if a trader accustomed to $100 maximum profits scales to a position where potential profits reach $400, the temptation to close trades early may be overwhelming.

To ease this transition, a trader might simulate the larger trades in a “ghost account,” which mirrors live trading without risking real capital. This simulation allows the trader to become comfortable with the numbers, building confidence without financial exposure. Creating and Committing to a Scaling Plan An effective scaling plan is data-driven, with metrics and thresholds to guide scaling actions.

Regular reviews ensure the plan adapts to evolving market conditions and performance outcomes. Like all elements of a trading system, a scaling plan requires discipline, objectivity, and data-driven actions rather than emotional reactions. Summary Scaling is an advanced trading concept that, when applied correctly, can optimize profit potential while managing risk.

This guide outlined various scaling approaches—Fixed Lot Size, Fixed Fractional, Selective Strategy, and Variable Scaling—each with distinct applications depending on the trader’s experience, strategy, and market conditions. Fixed lot size scaling offers simplicity and is suitable for beginners or automated trading, while fixed fractional scaling aligns well with account growth or decline. Selective strategy scaling focuses on increasing successful strategies' position sizes, while variable scaling dynamically adjusts to market conditions, requiring deep technical knowledge.

The guide also emphasized key performance metrics for effective scaling and highlighted the psychological challenges involved, with strategies for managing emotional responses. Ultimately, a successful scaling plan is disciplined, data-driven, and regularly reviewed to ensure alignment with trading objectives. Traders who develop and commit to a structured scaling approach can enhance their trading results by making informed, calculated adjustments to position sizes based on performance metrics and risk tolerance.

Australia's second quarter CPI due out on the 31st of July could go one of two ways so let's dive into how it will move and how to trade it. First way - Coming in line or below Currently 24 of the 30 surveyed economists see inflation coming in line or below expectations. That is June quarter CPI coming in at 1% quarter on quarter and 3.8% year on year.

Trimmed mean expected to come in at 0.9 of 1% quarter on quarter and 4% year on year remembering this is the preferred measure of the RBA. If this is indeed the case it would mean a step down from the March quarter read which was 1% and would hold year on year inflation at 4%. We need to highlight the RBA own forecast as well, because at the last Statement of Monetary Policy update the forecasted head inflation was the same as the consensus 3.8% year on year.

But trimmed mean inflation is 0.2% lower at 3.8% year on year. This will be interesting because the Hawks out there believe anything that is 3.9 or above will be a trigger for the RBA next Tuesday. The variance can be put down to several things how the trimming is actually done but what really matters to us as traders is the impact of dwelling and rents on the inflation figure which has been a key factor for inflation overshooting over the last two years.

If we have a look at rent, expectation is for a 1.9% June quarter rise down from 2.1% in the March quarter. So trending in the right direction but still well above a comfortable and sustainable level. Rent’s overall contribution to the full figure at this point is 0.12 compared to house purchases which is only 0.08 the expectation for the June quarter is 1% the house purchases have 1.9% for utilities.

This gives a combined figure of 1.35% for the June quarter in housing. It is the number one thing to watch on Wednesday. Health is the other part of the inflation data to watch.

We've not got any major updates in the monthly CPI data about health and the expectation is for the June quarter to see a 2.5% increase in health inflation. This is the other part of the data that will matter. We highlight all this to give you as much information as possible to make informed decisions at the 11:30 Australian Eastern Standard Time drop.

Because if the data does come in at these levels it will probably be enough to confirm the RBA will hold at their August 6 meeting. And in line or below figure is likely met with dovish views and bearish trading. More on that below.

Second way: Above expectations What's so interesting about Wednesday's CPI is that for the last 6 consecutive quarterly updates Australia CPI has not just come in above consensus it has been above the full range of views. It's why its giving us reason to pause and to suggest that there is every chance based on the data from the monthly inflation figures the upside surprise is a very real possibility. Retail spending although sluggish has remained above expectations, services have seen reasonable price increases during the April to June.

As things like insurance, telecommunications and utilities increase prices well and truly above the inflation rate. Education already expected to be strong has also seen wage increases during this quarter along with higher infrastructure spending from state governments. Housing which is already forecasted to be strong has surprised to the upside in every one of those six previous readings and according to Core Logic and Prop Track data of the April to June figures suggests that it could be a seventh time in a row housing comes in above expectations.

The final unknown is the energy rebates. It's been so surprising just how long injury baits have been able to hold down electricity prices in the CPI. Several forecasts now show the snapback from these rebates is on.

If this transpires, the expectation is for energy to snap 7.2% higher in the June quarter. Now the caveat here is that already the federal government has put a new $300 per household energy rebate policy in place so maybe this will be ignored. But there's no getting away from the fact energy is the big unknown and one that could blow the CPI data well above expectations.

This is likely to see bullish bets being made on the August 6 RBA meeting and strong positioning in the Aussie dollar. We think at the moment this outcome is being discounted by the market and by the economic world. Because the question that needs to be asked can the RBA justify inflation now running above its own target for three years in a row?

We would argue it probably can't. What trade First and foremost, we need to warn against looking at AUDJPY and AUDUSD. The reason for this, do not forget pretty much at the same time as Australia’s CPI is being released the Bank of Japan is forecasted, for the first time in decades, to release it artificially depressed interest rates.

We know that the BoJ has been defending the JPY over the past month and having seen the AUDJPY get to as high as ¥109.5 in early July the cross now sits at parity. If the BoJ does do as forecasted the cross could do anything on Wednesday. Then there is the unknown about how traders will position with all the machinations the BoJ action and the CPI data means – realistically the cross could experience some mass volatility.

The other is that it is the beginning of the US Federal Reserve’s July meeting and although there is no expectation that they will cut rates on Thursday, it is unknown what would be said during chairperson Powell’s press conference. FX safety trade has been pretty solid over the last period and money has flowed back to the USD. We are unsure about what could happen over the 48 hours between the CPI and when the Fed reports for that reason, we think the USD is probably not the one to look at for this particular piece of data trade.

Thus crosses such as EURAUD, AUDNZD and even AUDCAD are probably better options if you are going to trade pre and post the CPI data as there is no major impact on the other side of the cross from fundamentals in the next 72 hour period. If you are looking to the August 6 RBA meeting you can look at AUDUSD and AUDJPY but with entry points late on Thursday or Friday when there will be a greater understanding about what the Bank of Japan and the US Federal Reserve have done and will do in the future. Happy trading