Scaling Trend Positions with Multiple Momentum Rules
Summary
The discussion addresses gradual entry into and exit from trend positions. One response points to research on heterogeneous investor expectations, positive feedback trading, and historical bubble behavior, including a case study of a broker riding the South Sea Company bubble. These references frame trend persistence and bubble dynamics, but do not establish a specific optimal pyramiding schedule.
A practical proposal assigns separate portions of capital to trend rules with different lookback periods. Their signals are added to set the overall exposure, so agreement across rules increases position size and disagreement reduces it or can reverse the position. This provides a gradual exposure mechanism for both entries and exits. The example is illustrative; the discussion supplies no performance evidence, transaction-cost analysis, or guidance on risk limits, and it does not identify a definitive research source for the multi-rule approach.
Key ideas
- Multiple trend rules can allocate separate portions of capital and combine their signals into one exposure.
- Longer and shorter momentum lookbacks can disagree, allowing position size to adjust as trend evidence changes.
- The cited bubble research explains investor behavior but does not specify an optimal scaling schedule.
- The proposed approach is illustrative and includes no empirical performance or risk analysis.
Tags
Full text
# Is there any research on pyramiding techniques of entering/exiting a trend? # Is there any research on pyramiding techniques of entering/exiting a trend? I am looking for any research about optimal strategies for gradually building (scaling in) positions inside a trend as well as optimal gradual exit strategies on pullbacks/reversals to minimise possible losses. ## Answer by jaamor (score 4) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/19016 Here is a collection of papers. The general idea is that the market has investor classes that share different expectations. When in bubble territory, many investors generally agree that assets are overpriced, but they still invest in expectation of more investors entering the market (the greater fools). There are also sophisticated investors who know assets are overpriced. If they act in tandem, then the bubble will collapse. In general no sophisticated investor is large enough to fight the irrational exuberance of a large number of retail investors and noise traders (generally speaking traders with "erroneous" beliefs that are following trends). Therefore from each sophisticated investor's perspective, there is synchronization risk in attacking the bubble. A list of papers follows: Harrison and Kreps of NYU, have written a paper called "Speculative market behavior in a stock market with heterogeneous expectations" where they create a model of a market with imperfect information, where different classes of investors have heterogeneous expectations. One of their results is that buy and hold is not profitable in their model's framework. "Positive Feedback Investment Strategies and Destabilizing Rational Speculation", a paper by De Long et. al, proposes a model to analyze positive feedback (i.e. trend following) investors. This is my favorite, and a good read. A 1720 case study of a bank/broker in Britain, that successfully rode the South Sea Company bubble. The paper is by Temin and Voth. ## Answer by Alex C (score 1) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/19018 The way to do gradual position entry and exit is to use multiple trend following rules, each of which is responsible for managing a part of the available capital. Only if all the trading rules agree will 100% of the capital be deployed. As a simple example, suppose you have three rules. The first rule is based on 10 day momentum; this rule produces a score of +1/3 if p[0]>p[10] (i.e. the price is up over the last 10 days) and -1/3 otherwise. The second rule is a 20 day momentum rule, with output 1/3 if 20 day momentum is positive, and -1/3 otherwise. The third rule is based on 40 day momentum, again 1/3 or -1/3 depending on the direction of prices the last 40 days. The overall stance is based on the sum of the three rules. So if 10, 20 and 40 day momentum is positive the overall score is 1/3+1/3+1/3 = 1 so you will be 100% long; if one rule is bullish and the other two are bearish you will have 1/3-1/3-1/3 = -1/3 so you will be 33% short. Of course this can be generalized and expanded in various ways. It is a well known idea, but I can't recall in what paper I first read about it.
Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.