There is no safe way to make money

In pips units like martingale etc.

We developed various logic to profit safely

There is no absolute Holy Grail

If there were an absolute Holy Grail

It would be “placing logic against the market is the Holy Grail.” That’s all.

However, even these do not become the Holy Grail because “the market is not absolute to begin with.”

That is the truth of the Holy Grail.

This is simply the truth of the Holy Grail as I know it.

There may truly be a Holy Grail, but I would take it to the grave without telling anyone, as a rule.

There is no benefit in doing otherwise.

Regarding placing logic against the market,

it must be able to respond to subsequent movements as well.

If you fail, you must still adapt the logic appropriately to that market.

“Always place logic that is appropriate for the market.” That can be the Holy Grail.

It can become so, but since it is only possible, to be frank it isn’t truly a Holy Grail—so be aware of that.

As for the logic,

you would deal with it using a low-volume averaging-in (nampin) with a hedged long/short concept.

That kind of approach.

The opposite would be low-volume pyramiding

or making a one-shot stop-loss trade

or making a one-shot reversal

These four concepts are mainly usable as trading logic, I believe.

This is based on my own market view.

A note on nampin

Trades that cut losses and take profit with single-sided nampin are

at the same time inferior to a one-shot trade in terms of profit opportunities.

When the market moves in a certain direction,

under the nampin concept

unlike a one-shot, profits become smaller

and losses increase by the nampin amount as the trend emerges.

So the result is that profits become small.

Of course there are cases where it succeeds, but

“it takes time to realize profit” and

“losses grow over time as the market continues in a certain direction” risk exists.

Also, nampin is founded on two ideas: to cover losses and to recover to make a profit, right?

Since it aims to “recover and take profits,”

if the market does not come back, losses become large.

Not many people can deftly manage nampin with discretion.

Because it aims to recover profits, you must maintain the belief that the market will return.

Therefore, generally speaking, it is better to tightly control with stop-losses.

However, if you place a stop-loss, there is no need to nampin.

Why is that? Because if you place a stop-loss,

the best approach is to “go for the trend with a one-shot.”

The original meaning of nampin is

“to make money even if no trend appears,” right?

Yet placing a stop-loss undermines that necessity.

So I think you should employ hedged nampin.

It acts as a temporary preservation of losses, and

when Dow Theory directions change, you realize the profits from the preserved lots

and then re-enter nampin at a lower lot size to generate profit.

And that is not all.

With hedged nampin, when a trend emerges, you can keep “unrealized profits” piling up.

This can fully satisfy profits.

I think that if you keep applying nampin to the market, you can operate well.

Conversely, if you cannot do that, one-shot trading is more suitable.

The opposite approach of nampin, a trend-following pyramid strategy,

is actually feasible with one-shot trades, so there is little need for it.

One-shot trades are more profitable with trend-following pyramiding in terms of losses and profits.

Are one-shot and reversal the same?

There are similarities and differences.

Reversals both continue to move in the trend direction,

so in one-shot trades you remain faithful to the market and can trade whether it’s a trend or a range.

Reversal trades are possible against such market conditions, but both require moving forward rapidly.

One-shot trades have better trading efficiency; profitability aside,

if you do the same trade as a one-shot, reversals delay stop-losses.

Because few people effectively minimize losses, stop-losses are generally better results.

Therefore, there is little need to use reversals.

If a reversal would cause a 50 pips loss when reversing, placing a stop-loss is safer.

Regarding the logic,

Trend-following pyramiding ×

Short-term and medium-term one-shot trades good ✓

Using hedges with low-volume nampin that responds to the market good ✓

Medium-term reversals △

That’s about it.

This is solely my perspective.

In the market

When a genuine trend emerges

A one-shot and nampin logic both work with the assumption that there are profits on hand—that is the Holy Grail.

My summary of the Holy Grail

If there were an absolute Holy Grail, it would be “placing logic against the market”—that’s the only one.

However, since the market itself is not absolute, it cannot be the Holy Grail—that is the truth of the Holy Grail.

It is the truth I know; there may truly be a Holy Grail, but I would take it to the grave in that style.

To place logic against the market, the logic must be able to respond to subsequent movements.

If the market fails, you must adjust your logic to suit that market.

“Always place logic that is appropriate for the market.” That can be the Holy Grail.

It is possible, but remember that it is not truly a Holy Grail.

Placing logic against the market

Placing logic appropriate to the market pattern

If it fails, reorganize it into a logic that is appropriate to the market

That’s about it.