In the prior post, I stated that Rule #3 was very important to me. This is because I am more "comfortable" getting entirely out of a position than "holding on" during the down trend. But when it comes time to Sell, my methods require me to hold on until "after" the ("a") peak -- so I often watch Long-Term Moving Averages for Exit points (and have recently been using the "Reverse Ocroft Method", as well).
This Rule #3 (and the last paragraph in Rule #10) have caused me to think in terms of obeying the AIM signals to Sell along the way, and then, close the position with the other signals.
What I mean is, I don't really have a problem with "getting out" with less than the "maximum profit", or "leaving money on the table". If the Fed wasn't doing "ZIRP", I would be quite content with the "normal" interest rate on CDs and not even think about the Stock Market for the major portion of my life savings.
So, I am going to go back through my position's histories and simulate obeying those Sell signals, to see how "drastically" this idea would have affected my results. Would they still have met my "true goals", and just reduced my "greed goals"? Am I, after all, one of the "greedy"?
Regards,
Bob
