Does taking partial profits actually make a difference?
Why not just take 100% at TP1? If price reverses after TP1 and comes back to break-even, it feels like you’re leaving money on the table. So the question is:
Do partials actually make more money in the long run, or do they just reduce profits?
To find out, I’m running an experiment.
🔹 Main account:
* TP1 = take partials
* Move SL to BE
* TP2 = take more profit
* Move SL to TP1
* Let the rest run
🔹 Test spot account:
* Same entries
* Same setups
* Same risk
* 100% closed at TP1
Everything else stays exactly the same.
I’ll track both accounts for at least 1 month, and possibly extend it to 3 months for a larger sample size.
Which account do you think will perform better?
📈 Full TP at TP1
or
📊 Scaling out with partials and trailing stops?
We’ll find out.
This won’t affect our normal trading. It’s simply a side experiment to see which approach produces better results over time..
————————–
我想了很久：
我考虑这个问题很久了：
部分获利真的有区别吗？
为什么不在TP1时就全部获利呢？如果价格在TP1后反转并回到盈亏平衡点，感觉就像是把钱留在了桌子上。那么问题是：
部分获利在长期内真的能赚更多钱，还是只是减少了利润？
为了找出答案，我正在进行一个实验。
🔹 主账户：
* TP1 = 部分获利
* 将止损移至盈亏平衡
* TP2 = 继续获利
* 将止损移至TP1
* 让剩余部分继续运行
🔹 测试现货账户：
* 相同的入场
* 相同的设置
* 相同的风险
* 在TP1时100%平仓
其他一切保持完全相同。
我将跟踪这两个账户至少一个月，可能会延长到三个月以获得更大的样本量。
你认为哪个账户表现会更好？
📈 在TP1时全额获利
还是
📊 通过部分获利和跟踪止损逐步获利？
我们将拭目以待。
这不会影响我们的正常交易。这只是一个旁侧实验，看看哪种方法随着时间的推移能产生更好的结果。