Ajit Mishra

@Peoplewish Couldn’t agree more. It’s not only small accounts but even large accounts and many funds who are into leveraged stocks or etfs. When there is a trend leveraged or inverse leveraged stocks/etfs can be very rewarding. Imo, risks can be well managed with leveraged vs options.

I guess you’re not familiar with the concept of small account edge. It was popularized by Qullamaggie. The idea is simple: as your account gets larger, your opportunity set gets smaller. You have fewer liquid technical setups you can use as timing tools to allocate capital efficiently. For smaller accounts, liquidity on a per-position basis is much less of an issue because smaller position sizes are not going to move most stocks. You just need to scale your average dollar-volume criteria to your account size and update it as your account grows, so a 10% position does not materially impact the stock when you enter. Therefore the universe of stocks, the "opportunity set" that a small account has many more names in it than that of a larger account. The point I was making assumes you already understand small account edge. And with the explosive growth of leveraged equity-based ETFs, that edge has gotten even sharper. Small accounts with real skill, but limited capital, now have access to vehicles that can move as fast as microcap short-squeeze pump-and-dumps, without being forced into the same low-quality, illiquid, manipulated names. That changes the opportunity set. A small account can now deploy capital into leveraged ETFs tied to real blue-chip companies, themes, indexes, or sectors, and still get the type of velocity that used to mostly exist in the sketchiest corners of the microcap market. And just because you’ve spent five times longer in the markets than I have does not automatically mean you’ve studied them more, understood them better, or been more successful. I am not saying that from a place of arrogance. I am saying it from the standpoint of having a civil conversation and sharing my thoughts with the world. I respect my elders, but if you are going to tell me I am wrong and enter the conversation that way, then come correct. Explain your position. Make the argument. Don’t just dismiss the point without showing that you actually understand what is being said.

@RealSimpleAriel I've noticed that you are trying to short it from early 60s and had a success during market correction but even then, it bounced back fast. For a stock like this, I'll let it fall by its own weight (negative catalyst) and then short.

@RealSimpleAriel (d) Revenue growth accelerated sharply...Technicals (you are an expert) (a) Momentum continuation not topping behavior (b) high short interest (c) volume expansion (d) didn't break even 50sma during market cyclical correction this year....

If you thought Quantum was insane wait until you tell your kids about the time a 30mil revenue company which operates at a loss was up 11,353% in 13 months. $AXTI has been nothing short of wild and today sits at a fun 380% above it's 200sma.

@mmonis Most probably not, because you are comparing one stock (and that’s a crappy one) to whole stock market. Is the stock market extended? Absolutely…If it drops 2-3% then the extension will be reduced and it can go much higher.

$QQQ - When the index behaves like this, Everyone is a genius. Has this ever happened before...? The chart looks like $CAR - Hope it does not end the same way.

@PurpleDrink_LLC Fear sells faster 😂😂😂 Many stocks in these hot themes are showing excellent numbers and getting rewarded. It will take a breather and gonna be a nice buying opportunity. What can be a bigger proof of high RS that even in this yr correction, true leaders didn’t budge?

I see everybody is scared as shit now that memory and CPU's are simultaneously into nosebleed territory Power Trends don't die like this less than a month in. We have new EP's emerging. A little rest is probably coming soon but as long as you're aware of that and not max yolo long right now it'll be fine imo

@RealSimpleAriel Your analogy is 🎯 Tricky part is in the last one year, many times these stocks got extended. That’s why right entry, as close as 1 month back, gave a very good cushion (eg., 100% rally in 4 weeks for $SNDK). Till it won’t break major supports, all is well 😂

There is buying stock out of a tight base or high tight flag, and then there is buying out of whatever the F this is lol. $SNDK $MU $AMD $MRVL $STX $GOOGL $MXL $INTC. If your just getting bullish now your doing it ALL wrong. There is buying a stock on the 2nd floor and the 42nd floor. one can break your ankle. the other can break your neck.

@NickDrendel For short term, this is setting up for a nice short opportunity and for long term holders, a nice opportunity (once it dips and forms a base) to add more 😀 With leaders like these, both sides will be happy. There are not many stocks in the market which checks most of the boxes.

Potential day 2 of potential blow off top moves for $MU & $SNDK and day 1 for $INTC. Another 2-3 gap ups & expansion days & the short setup comes into play. But after $SLV Quantums $CAR, etc. The game plan is simple. Above VWAP = Long Below VWAP = Short Do not complicate it.

@NickDrendel Market cap to GDP ratio was ~55% in 1987 and today it's 230% and some people think that 30% crash will happen just like that? Suuure....Even in current year cyclical correction to $SPY, many stocks from the leading themes couldn't even drop below 50sma.

@ajitosu Right? Hey they stock market has gone up at nearly every point in history, but remember that one time!

Crashes don't happen above the 10/20EMAs by the way. If we get a crash like 1987 price will already be below 10/20 and likely the 50SMA and 200SMA like it did back then.

@JSpitTrades There seems many from small cap and mini cap $VECO $WATT $OPTX $ELVA $SKYT $UCTT $ALTO $RFIL $VSH $ADTN $ATEX $LWLG $INTT etc. it’s not that easy to get positioned in these names as there is always a risk of dilution.

What's the best stock that no one is talking about?

@n_bancroft2 Thanks to your simple approach. I got positioned in most of these quality stocks during the recent dips and having a cushion now makes life so peaceful. This is my playground. Till a stock in my portfolio is not breaking any major support, I’m not doing anything.

Reminder (to myself as well) that a stock will close at the same price whether you look at it 50 times throughout the day or 2. If you’ve got cushion and they’re acting well, get off the screens and leave them alone. Money is made in the sitting.

@ohiain Eye opener for me was @RealSimpleAriel Oct’25 return, his hit rate was 18% (if I’m not wrong). Profit was ~$4M despite of 18% hit rate. His losses were in 4 figs and 5 figs, and gains in high 6 figs. Seeing that, I made my risk management rule non-negotiable 😀

Win rate is one of the most overrated metrics in trading. Risk-to-reward is what actually pays you, so let me break it down for you. Back in 2021-2022, a lot of “furus” sold beginners on flashy stats like 90% win rate because it sounds impressive to people who don’t understand the math. New traders hear that and think consistency. I hear that and immediately ask one question: What’s the average winner vs. average loser? Because that’s the whole game. I think @NickSchmidt brought up a very important topic. Trading is not a popularity contest, and definitely not about how often you’re right. It’s simply a math problem that only YOU can solve. And the traders who understand that early skip years of pain and frustration. I’ll give you a real example. 1) Example 1: High Win Rate, Terrible Risk/Reward Trader A wins 9 out of 10 trades. Sounds amazing, right? But every winner makes +$100, and the one loser is -$1,200. Math: 9 wins = +$900 1 loss = -$1,200 Net = -$300 So despite being right 90% of the time… he lost money. That’s the trap. A lot of traders build systems designed to feel good, not make money. They take tiny gains quickly, then freeze when wrong and let one loser wipe out weeks of work. That style works… until it doesn’t. And when it breaks, it breaks violently. -- 2) Example 2: Lower Win Rate, Strong Risk/Reward Trader B wins only 4 out of 10 trades. Sounds mediocre to most beginners. But each winner makes +$500, and each loser is capped at -$100. Math: 4 wins = +$2,000 6 losses = -$600 Net = +$1,400 Wrong more often, but far more profitable. That’s real trading. I would rather have a 30% win rate with 5:1R setups than a 90% win rate with sloppy negative expectancy. Why? Because one compounds, and the other eventually implodes. This is why risk-to-reward is my main focus every single day. Before I enter any trade, I’m asking: - Where am I wrong? - How much am I risking? - Does the reward justify the attempt? - What is the realistic upside if I’m right? If the answer is no, I pass. "But... how do I incorporate this into my OWN system?" 1. Tight entries at major pivots: I’m looking for asymmetric spots where I know quickly if I’m wrong. EMA reclaim, gap support, 15/30 min pivot, weekly breakout retest, etc. That keeps risk small. 2. Leaders in strong groups: I want names that can actually move if I’m right. No point risking $1 to make $0.80 in dead names. 3. Immediate invalidation: If price loses the level that made the trade attractive, I’m gone. I think of small losses as business expenses. 4. Let winners breathe: If I catch momentum, I trim strategically and let part of the position work. That’s where the asymmetry comes from. I see most beginners obsess over being right, but you'll see the best traders obsess over expectancy/probabilities. Which means... (Win rate x average win) - (Loss rate x average loss) That’s what matters. 1) You can be a bad trader with a high win rate. 2) You can be an excellent trader with a low win rate. ...the scoreboard is your equity curve. What I gravitate towards: - Average winner - Average loser - Max drawdown - R multiple per trade - Did you follow the plan? Trading is simple math wrapped in difficult psychology. And once you understand that… Risk-to-reward becomes the edge. I don't see #fintwit talking enough about this topic:

@n_bancroft2 So true. Why cut/trim leaders when the chart looks good, numbers look good, they are from a leading theme and the overall market is conducive. I was amazed by seeing no dent in photonics and memory leaders in the last 2-3 months despite of weaknesses in the overall market.

'Sell in to strength or you'll be forced to sell in to weakness' See this quoted a lot and may be playing devils advocate here, but it seems like selling in to weakness is often touted as inferior to selling in to strength. Which I find interesting given that it is absolutely possible to sell in to weakness higher than you sell in to strength. I think the only thing that matters in regards to where you sell is that you followed your rules and that it makes sense for your strategy. For example, last year my average winner was 6.5x my average loser. And my biggest winners I held for months. So it makes no real sense for me to sell in to strength after a short period as it would negatively impact my bottom line. ‘Locking some in’ doesn’t help me to hold for longer, I have rules to follow for that. And I don’t really care about ‘smoothing out my equity curve’. I’m basically just looking to maximise my R/R. Bottom line; do what works for you and your strategy.

This is trading in $80s now, with the same logic why not short now? If not, then your logic was flawed it was NOT the stock rather the environment which was bearish.

Until 10 days back, there were many people shorting photonics stocks (digital footprint 😂) $AXTI $AAOI without realizing that this theme would be to first to go up when the market improves. One of the reason for shorting (say $AXTI) in early 60s was, it rallied 6400% last yr

@mmonis Market correction is the true test of leaders and this sector has surpassed the expectations 😀 Other than memory stocks, it seems there is no non-defensive sector having a clear trend. $UFO maybe, $XBI is non-buyable unless someone knows the stocks very very well.

All of a sudden, I am seeing folks posting photonics stocks. Isn't it 100% late? It could still work, though...

@RealSimpleAriel Wish geopolitics were that straightforward in today’s world 😀 There are a couple of nice books on this topic for anyone interested, Chokepoints, Enduring Hostilities, World Order, How States Think.

For any history buffs out there. The Battle of Alesia in 52 BCE was a siege by Julius Caesar against Gallic warriors. Aleisa was positioned on a plateau between rivers. That was a natural defense, but also made them vulnerable to being cut off from supplies. This type battle is know as a siege by starvation. The idea is to surround a fortress or city and wait until defenders run out of supplies, driven by hunger rather than direct military defeat. Seeing Trump cut off ships entering or leaving the Strait Hormuz will certainly have financial impact, in essence starving out the Iranians. The idea is to wait them out and capitulate to his demands. Patience will be the name of this game. Allowing Iran to just sit inside their cities making little to no income on crude passing through the strait. History doesn't always repeat but it certainly rhymes.

@RealSimpleAriel Very true, Ariel. Last week clearly showed who are the true leaders and who all will rally hard in a conducive market.

Everyone is going to talk about the “no deal” between the United States and Iran. Let me be blunt. The news does not matter. It’s the reaction to the news that does. Know your setups. Know your entry tactics. Position size properly and use progressive exposure. K.I.S.S.

@1ChartMaster One can clearly see the differences between leaders and laggards. Photonics players rallied a couple hundred % last year, hardly any weaknesses in the last 2 months, and now rallying hard.

Lesson all new traders should have learned this week. Listening to charts and believing what you are seeing is far more important than what you are hearing on the news. The charts tell the story. 💯