You ever heard the adage “just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should” ? The same is true in trading. And specifically, the same is true in establishing protective stop-loss levels on your open positions.
Investors have been taught that stop losses should be in place for any trade at any given time. The idea is simply that one of the keys to making any money in this game is to, at the very least, not lose money…..an idea that we whole-heartedly agree with. However, the exchanges may or may not be offering you the best way to implement such a protective plan. Heck, they may even be doing you a disservice. Fortunately, there is a way around the problem.
You know those stop levels you’ve programmed into your open trades? Those exact exit parameters are actually monitored and executed by the market makers (the middle men) on the exchange floors. Or in the case of NASDAQ stocks, the middle men still act in the same capacity….they just do it electronically. The problem is, the market makers also make your stop-loss information available to anybody who’s willing to pay for it. You’ve heard of level 2 data? That’s part of the data set.
On the surface, it may seem irrelevant if someone else knows your ‘make or break’ tolerance levels. After all, you’re going to make exits at a certain price no matter what happens. And if it were only a few shares or a few traders with a stop at any certain price, then you’re right - it really wouldn’t matter. The practice turns into a problem when a large number of investors start using the same stop prices, or when a major institution (ok, or an individual) has millions of shares just on the verge of triggering an exit due to a stop-level being reached. Since all of that information is completely transparent, there’s an opportunity for someone else with a big enough wallet to misuse the trade instructions you’ve left with the market makers.
How could stops work against you? A couple of different ways.
In some cases, a fund company or major market player may avoid buying a particular stock if they can see that there are numerous stops just under the current price. Should the market sink even just a little bit, then that particular stock could go through a major wave of selling, if all those stops are triggered simultaneously. And we all know what happens when there are more sellers than buyers. It’s not an unethical practice to avoid buying stocks for that reason, but you certainly don’t want to prevent an institution from buying stocks you already own - that’s what forces stocks to go higher.
The second way someone could misuse that data is also the way we’re most concerned about - by using our stops against us by temporarily forcing a stock price past our stop level. Once all of the stops at or near a particular price are triggered - and all of the current shareholders are essentially flushed out of their position - then a major player can step in, and buy all of those shares (usually at a depressed price). This same player will also essentially be in the driver’s seat. Unethical? It depends on the reason and strategy, but usually yes, it’s unethical. Illegal? It’s supposed to be. Does it happen anyway? You bet.
This particular problem is exaggerated for our small and micro-cap stocks. When only a few shares are traded on a daily basis, and it’s easy for a major institution or large investor to buy and sell a lot of shares, it’s also easy to push a stock around - in terms of price.
That’s why we encourage the use of ‘mental’ stops. What’s a mental stop? Glad you asked. It’s precisely what it sounds like it is….a stop level that is only applied in your head. In doing it that way, you’re not subject to the whims of somebody else. Instead, you’re in the driver’s seat. Now, good discipline dictates that once your stop level is violated that you do go ahead and make your exits then. So in that sense, a stop is a stop, no matter how it’s applied. But there’s still a major advantage in applying your stops yourself. Namely, you can still shop (i.e. fight) for a particular exit price.
See, once a traditional stop-loss order is triggered, it becomes a regular market order, which means your stock is sold at the next available price. The problem is that the ‘next available price’ could be several cents - if not several dollars - under your actual stop level (market orders are the birthplace for bad fills). When you’re not just leaving it up to someone else to place your trade at any price they can, your bottom line tends to be much better. (The caveat here is to not get too picky - the road to the poor house is lined with investors who didn’t adhere to their basic stop strategy.)
The other benefit to a mental stop is that it doesn’t tip your hand to the rest of the market, so to speak. Many is the time when an institution drove a price down just far enough to trigger a lot of stop-based exits, only to turn around and drive a stock price much, much higher with a massive buy-in. If a stock is only a few cents under your mental stop, and there’s clear support for that equity around that price, then you may want to apply a little patience. And yes, that’s a little bit contradictory with the paragraph you just read before this one….proof that trading is less of a science, and more of an art.
In any case, where it makes sense, and where an investor has the aptitude and willingness to do so, using mental stops is a far better idea than submitting your stop levels to the exchanges for others to use - and potentially abuse.
Just food for thought.