Today we are privileged to be joined by one of the
world’s leading authorities on trading psychology, Dr. Brett Steenbarger. Dr.
Steenbarger is the author of the popular trading book, “The
Psychology of Trading.” He is Director of Trader Development for Kingstree
Trading in Chicago and is Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry and
Behavioral Science at SUNY Upstate Medical University in Syracuse, NY. Dr.
Steenbarger not only has academic credentials--he has actively traded over the
last 20 years--he truly provides a fresh voice in the often-stale subject of the
mental game of trading. Let’s get started...
Dave:
Welcome to Real World Trading, Dr. Brett.
Dr. Brett:
Thank you, Dave. It’s a real pleasure to be part of RealWorldTrading.com. One of
the joys of my work is the opportunity to be a part of people’s personal and
professional success. I’m looking forward to contributing to the success of your
subscribers.
Dave: I
find your work fascinating, particularly your ability to break complex theories
into easily understandable and instantly applicable rules. One of my favorites
is your three vices of trading. Please tell us each vice.
Dr. Brett:
I first wrote about the three vices in an article on my website,
www.brettsteenbarger.com as part of a seminar I offered Woodie’s CCI Club, a
large group of traders who educate each other about pattern-based technical
trading. The response to the article was favorable because the vices seem to
capture many of the mistakes we’ve all made as traders.
The first vice
is perfectionism, the tendency to set unreasonable goals and standards for
oneself. I can’t tell you how often I’ve heard a trader express frustration with
a winning trade because “I should have taken more out of the move.” What the
trader is really saying is, “I should have been able to catch the absolute highs
and lows.” Because their standard is unrealistic, it sets them up for
frustration, turning winning trades into psychological failures. If traders find
themselves using the term “should” frequently when talking about their trading,
there’s a good chance that perfectionism is lurking in the background.
Perfectionism is not about being achievement oriented or competitive;
perfectionism is a repetitive emotional pattern of self-talk that says, “What
you’ve done isn’t good enough.”
The second vice
is ego. Ego enters into our trading when we write a blank check for our
self-esteem, allowing our feelings about ourselves to ride the ups and downs of
our P/L statements. Hanging onto losing trades to avoid feeling like a
loser: that’s one manifestation of ego. Impulsively putting on a trade after a
losing trade to make back your money—revenge trading--that’s ego at work
as well. One of the most common but subtle examples of ego is the tendency to
fight the market by picking tops and bottoms. This leads traders to fade strong
markets and buy falling ones. This can work fine in range-bound markets, but
inevitably leads to disastrous drawdowns in trending markets. If the need to be
right—to beat the market—is stronger than the need to make money, the seeds of
trading self-destruction are sown.
The third vice
is overconfidence. Traders often assert that their trading is hurt by a
lack of confidence. My experience, however, is that it is more common for
traders to be hurt by their overconfidence. A simple litmus test that
distinguishes valid confidence from overconfidence is to keep a log of each
trade placed during a day or week (or, better yet, videotape your trading) and
ask the question: “What was my edge for this trade?” If you cannot identify a
specific edge for the trade, the odds are good that your trade is born of
overconfidence. Very often, overconfidence takes the form of overtrading:
actively trading narrow, thin markets, trading position size that is
inappropriate for one’s account size. Overconfidence is also evident when
traders focus on entries but fail to identify exits, particularly to stop
losses. It is easier to think about entries—the opportunities to make money—than
face the possibility of loss or limits on profits. Great traders have an
understanding of—and respect for—risk management. When that respect is missing,
overconfidence is generally the culprit.
Dave: I
often see those in myself when trading. Can you suggest ways to conquer each one
of these vices?
Dr. Brett:
Notice that the three vices are closely intertwined. Perfectionism, ego, and
overconfidence all share one element: the tendency to derive one’s feelings
about oneself from the outcomes of trading. That is one reason I worry about
traders who make trading their entire lives. If all of your self-esteem eggs are
in the trading basket, it is going to be difficult to separate yourself from
your trading results during those inevitable dry spells. The simplest and most
powerful way to overcome this problem is to have a rich life apart from trading:
other productive pursuits, collegial relationships, romantic relationships,
recreational activities, etc. It is difficult for me to put too much ego into my
trading, for example, simply because I am surrounded each day by things that are
so much more important than any day’s, week’s, or month’s trading results: my
wife and children, my counseling activities, my extended family and friends. A
rich and broad life brings much needed perspective to trading.
The other way I
help people overcome these vices is by focusing on the process of
trading, rather than the outcome. If necessary, we’ll cut back to trading
one-lots in order to take the pressure and allure of outcomes out of the
equation. Then we can just focus on trading well. For instance, I
encourage traders to verbalize each trade as a scientific hypothesis: we are
making an educated guess as to the direction of the next market movement. That
forces traders to also identify how they will know their hypothesis is being
validated, and how they will know if it is proven wrong. Requiring traders to
talk their thinking aloud grounds them in the trading process and allows them to
just let the outcomes take care of themselves. I am forever talking to new
traders about the importance of distinguishing between losing trades and bad
trades. Some very good hypotheses sometimes fail to find support. A bad trade is
one that was placed impulsively, not scientifically. My mentor and friend,
Victor Niederhoffer, impressed upon me the need to think scientifically about
markets. His excellent books are a living tribute to the Galtonian tradition in
trading. If you don’t know who Francis Galton is, take the time to read a
biography and think about his approach to knowledge. You will learn much about
the process of acquiring market knowledge.
Dave: We
all have negative habitual behavior patterns that sabotage our success as
traders. What are the common negative behavior patterns you have observed in
traders?
Dr. Brett:
Let me focus on one very common pattern: the tendency to focus on negative
behaviors rather than positive ones. Traders generally come to me wanting to
discuss their shortcomings: their negative traits, their bad trades, their
conflicts. Only rarely do they want to take a look at their successes. And yet,
if you think about it, your strengths are all you have to build upon. No amount
of reducing negative qualities will, in itself, generate positive ones.
Eliminating bad trades will not give you good ones. It is vitally important to
look at what you’re doing right in the markets and see how you can build upon
those successes. What works for you in the market? What is it that you’re
looking at, what is it that you’re doing, when your trading goes well? That
will do more than address your problems: it will offer solutions.
Dave:
Is there a simple way to identify solutions?
Dr. Brett:
First, keep a log of all trades. Make sure you identify the trade direction,
size, holding period for the position, and profit/loss. Then at the end of each
day correlate those trades with two things: what was happening in the markets
and what was happening in your head. Focus on your very best trades and ask
yourself: What was the market doing at those times? How was I processing
information at those times? You’ll see some interesting patterns. For instance,
in my own trading, I found that my best trades uniformly occurred in the
mornings and were the result of homework that I had done the night before and
observations I made during the overnight, Globex trading session. I had an idea
in my head that I was going to be a full-time trader, but the reality is that I
traded best when I traded for a couple hours a day, staying task-focused for
short amounts of time, and putting large size on just one or two tested ideas.
Had I not performed an inventory of my winners, I’d still be trying to fix my
busted afternoon trades!
Dave: A
unique concept of yours involves helping traders to become their own therapists.
I understand that you do not sell any private consulting services for traders,
preferring to teach traders to help themselves. Is there a step-by-step system
that we as traders can use to become our own therapists?
Dr. Brett:
If I were Ed Seykota, I’d probably respond by saying that the first step in the
system is to recognize that there is no step-by-step system. Traders in search
of change frequently look outside themselves, and the desire for a foolproof
system continues this error. We become our own therapists when we realize that
we, like the markets, are patterned, and when we become keen observers of our
patterns. To the degree that we stand apart from our patterns as observers, we
cannot be consumed by those patterns. That simple insight forms the cornerstone
of change systems as seemingly different as Zen, Freudian analysis, and the
Gurdjieff work. If there is a recipe for change, it is this: 1) place yourself
in situations that, in the past, have elicited problem patterns of thinking,
feeling, and/or acting; 2) stay mindful in these situations, fully experiencing
desires/impulses to respond in the customary (problematic) ways, but consciously
making efforts to respond in new ways; and 3) actively rehearse new,
constructive ways of responding discovered in this manner until they become
automatic. The important thing is to undertake change in the very situations
that elicit your problem patterns. Talking about change apart from the contexts
in which your patterns occur is not a productive use of time. You can’t change
your trading by talking with a trading coach. You can only change your trading
during your trading.
Dave:
That is fascinating. What is your opinion on the standard self-help books that
cram the shelves at every bookstore? Is the knowledge contained within these
books beneficial to traders?
Dr. Brett:
Some books are quite helpful, in that they provide ideas for seeing yourself in
new ways. My own career in psychology was inspired by a book called The
Fountainhead by Ayn Rand. Ms. Rand was a master at portraying the human
heroic spirit. When I read her book during my sophomore year at Duke, I
immediately realized that my mission in life would be to help people find their
own heroism. Ideas move the world, and the right books are phenomenal
repositories of ideas.
That having
been said, I’m not sure that books really provide self-help. They provide ideas
for self-help. Self-help is something you do, not something you read. A
desperate trader relying on a book is a bit like a starving man seeking
sustenance in a menu.
Dave:
Trading is truly one of the last refuges of the individual. You are totally
responsible for your actions or lack thereof. You talk about seeking the path of
least comfort. What do you mean by this?
Dr. Brett:
One of the things I teach beginning therapists is that the purpose of working
with people is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Most of us
are too comfortable with our patterns. We repeat our ways of thinking and
feeling mechanically, going through much of life mindlessly, without
self-awareness. In facing obstacles we take the path of least comfort; we push
ourselves to become more than we are. That is how we build muscles in a gym;
that is also how we become great traders. The really good traders are always
working on their trading, and when they’re not working on their trading, they’re
working on themselves. Nietzsche’s observation, “Under peaceful conditions, the
warlike man turns upon himself,” perfectly captures what it means to seek
discomfort.
Dave:
You stress the importance of having trading rules. Does this mean that the
discretionary trader is at a disadvantage to the mechanical or systematic
trader?
Dr. Brett:
Not at all. I am not at all a mechanical trader, but I do consider my trading to
be rule-governed. For instance, I will fade moves to an extreme in a range that
do not expand the number of stocks making fresh short-term new highs or lows. If
the number of stocks registering fresh two-hour highs or lows expands during a
move to a range extreme, I will play that move for continuation. I also have
rules for trading different times of day, especially in markets such as
currencies, where volatility can vary greatly within a single trading session.
Such rules can be tested for their accuracy, but need not be mechanically
implemented. I suspect chess players and special forces troops—others making
rapid decisions under conditions of risk/reward—similarly blend rule governance
and behavioral flexibility.
Dave:
Thank you for joining us today. Is there anything you would like to leave our
readers with?
Dr. Brett:
At root, trading is a function of pattern recognition, and pattern recognition
is a function of immersion in the markets. The majority of traders fail, not
because of occult psychological reasons, but because they lack such immersion.
Part-time traders are as likely to succeed as part-time surgeons or ballet
dancers. Frustration with trading is more often a result of trading problems
than a cause of them. Nothing in psychology substitutes for the arduous process
of absorbing the ever-changing patterns of markets. Psychology helps you make
the most of your experience; it does not provide that experience.