Many people just starting to trade contracts immediately think about full position trading, and the reasoning sounds quite reasonable—resisting volatility and avoiding liquidation. But this logic actually has a fatal flaw.



Full position trading is definitely not a safety net for arbitrarily adding leverage or recklessly using your positions. If you truly open a 10x leverage with a full position, a sudden market reversal could wipe you out—not just lose a little, but directly zero out your account. I’ve seen too many people make this mistake; they think full position is safe, so they have $5,000 in their account and dare to throw in $4,800 to gamble on short-term moves. As soon as there's a shake, they get liquidated instantly, with no chance to react.

The real purpose of full position trading is to give you a bit more room to breathe, not to risk your life on market fluctuations. With the same 10x leverage, some people lose a little and immediately cut losses, while others stubbornly hold on until they’re completely wiped out. What’s the difference? It’s in position allocation.

Here's a simple example. You have $1,000 in your account, and you only use $100 to open a 50x position. Even if you make a wrong judgment, you can stop loss in time, and the remaining money can still keep you afloat. But if you throw in $900 directly, even with just 10x leverage, a market swing could wipe out your entire account.

So don’t ask how many times leverage is safe—that’s the wrong question. The right question is: How much of my position am I using for this trade? Have I set a stop loss? Can I withstand a reversal?

I still trade contracts with full positions now, but there are a few strict rules I must follow: no single trade exceeds 20% of the total account, stop loss must be set, losses are controlled within 3% of the principal, no reckless trading in volatile zones, and definitely no impulsive adding to positions.

To survive and exit the market, it’s not about avoiding risk but learning how to manage it. Full position trading isn’t an excuse to go all-in at once; it’s about making you more flexible in responding to market fluctuations. The abyss is always there; we’re just learning to light that lamp. The rest depends on your own choices.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
NftDeepBreathervip
· 25m ago
That's right, all the people around me are just new investors who go all-in right away, their accounts are like roller coasters, going straight to zero. How many times has it been? The brothers still ask about leverage multiples, not realizing that position management is the real lifeline. I also follow these rules, especially the 20% ceiling, otherwise a single mistake could wipe everything out.
View OriginalReply0
OldLeekConfessionvip
· 21h ago
Damn, this is the real talk. I was the fool who threw 4800U into 5000U before.
View OriginalReply0
NFTHoardervip
· 21h ago
All-in and position management are two different things. Do you understand? Exactly, that's what it means.
View OriginalReply0
DuskSurfervip
· 21h ago
It's the same old theory. I've fallen for this before. Going all-in without setting a stop-loss is just giving it away.
View OriginalReply0
FlashLoanLordvip
· 21h ago
Well said, really. Going all-in is like a double-edged sword; beginners simply can't handle it. I did the same when I first started, and only after clearing my account twice did I understand. Stop-loss isn't an option; it's a lifesaver.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)