Gold is in profit on my account but I see the predictions are that it could go up to 3000.
I am in a fix whether to hold it with a potential to make a bigger profit or close with a small profit ($80).
What do you think?
Any industry insights?
This is always the tricky part for a novice like me!
Lock in or risk the ride - your call, bro.
keep in mind that $3 is a target, not a guarantee.
I think it’s tricky for everyone, really. Some perhaps say so more openly than others. I find “when to close in profit” really hard to judge.
In these cases I normally close half the position, adjust the stop-loss on the other half (tighter) and see what happens.
The good thing is that it limits how wrong you can be.
The bad thing is that it’s a compromise, which means that whatever happens, you could always have done better.
Avoiding losses is always my priority.
It is. I think the “secret” (if there really is one!) is to do enough backtesting and forward testing to produce a statistically valid answer to the question.
Easier said than done, sometimes.
But without it, isn’t every decision you make in your trading going to be a guess and/or a compromise?
Sometimes even after that, some decisions will still be guesses, but at least they’ll collectively be better informed ones? That can easily make the difference between profiting and losing overall.
Really helpful, that. 
I’d say gold, and American stocks are in a bubble. Eventually they’re going to crash hard, but nobody knows how high they’ll go before that happens.
personally I believe this will continue bullishly for now.
I think after that dump takes place, the price of the gold would still be higher than what is currently is.
Gold is up about 70% in little more than 2 years. Anything is possible, but I’ll be surprised if it gets much above 3000 before a correction of 20-30%
Hello.
To even attempt to give a remotely meaningful answer to a question like yours, I think the first thing to clarify is the time horizon. Let me explain: if a trader operates with a long-term perspective, he might say something like, “In my opinion, gold will reach $3,500 within two years.” However, I would personally prefer a technical or fundamental analysis to support such a claim—otherwise, that kind of opinion could just as easily come from the grocery store clerk, since it lacks any real argument.
But if, for example, you trade on a 1-hour or 5-minute timeframe, that trader’s opinion (even if it were Warren Buffett’s) wouldn’t be of much use to you.
Depending on your time horizon, you can then decide whether to rely more on technical analysis or also consider elements of fundamental analysis - such as future interest rate trends, supply and demand data based on World Gold Council reports, geopolitics, etc. - which typically have a longer-term impact.
20 to 30 percentttt?!!! dude, you are saying that gold will not go further than 3k, before falling to almost 2 k? think about what you are saying!
I know exactly what I’m saying. Gold’s price is in a bubble, there’s no justification for it doubling in 3 years when the typical cycle is much longer.
There’s every chance it goes much higher before crashing, nobody knows where the bubble pops until it does, and bubbles are based on people buying because they think it’ll keep going higher.
We’re detached from fundamentals in several markets, so the inevitable answer is a correction. Just like the bubble itself, these usually overshoot.
So yes, I think not much higher than 3000 is the top and down to around 2000 before recovering is very possible.
Good morning.
I agree with you when you say that there is a detach between fundamentals and several markets, but I don’t think that’s the case with gold.
You said: “there’s no justification for it doubling in 3 years when the typical cycle is much longer.”
From my point of view, the last 3 years haven’t been “typical” for several reasons:
And these are just some of the factors I identify. People more skilled and informed than I am can certainly provide a more precise picture. For example, a description of what is pushing gold up or down and what is happening was recently published on the Bank of France’s website. For the rise in gold prices, there are four causes:
For the decline, we have:
In the conclusions from the Bank of France, a large part of the boom is attributed to the purchases by emerging countries’ central banks, along with gold purchases by Chinese and Indian households.
Let’s be clear, it’s entirely possible for what you said to happen. After all, anything can occur in the markets, and it’s part of a trader’s job to consider various scenarios and remain ready and open to them, rather than fixating on a single conviction. However, as I mentioned in my previous post, I would personally appreciate it if someone, when expressing their opinion, also provided some arguments, because that’s the only way to make a truly informative contribution to a discussion whose goal should be to enrich the cultural background of its participants. Otherwise, that opinion remains, in my view, “just a pub talk.” Please don’t misunderstand me, I’m not saying this in a polemical or offensive tone.
Thank you for your attention.
Have a good day, everyone 
All of this sounds completely right, to me, and just on general economic and market principles it clearly makes sense.
But it’s lucky for all of us that we don’t have to be able to “predict” or even to “work with fundamentals” much, to be able to take profits out of the markets, isn’t it? 
Hello
I only partly agree with what you say.
It’s true that we don’t strictly need to work with fundamentals to take profits out of the markets; in the end, we trade what we see on the charts, and it’s those that we must primarily deal with. However, if we want to understand why we see what we see on the charts, it can be useful to link it with the fundamentals (1). There won’t always be a correspondence between the two sides of the same coin, but even noticing that such correspondence is absent at a certain moment provides information that can be useful to a trader (2).
It’s a bit like when you cover one eye with your hand. With only one eye you can still see, but your field of vision is more limited; your perception of spatial depth is reduced, etc. You’ll certainly still be able to run and dodge obstacles, but you’ll probably do so feeling less confident.
I’ll conclude by reiterating something I’ve said before: whether or not to rely on fundamentals depends greatly on the time horizon the trader adopts in his activity. The larger the timeframe a trader uses, the more weight the fundamentals should have. Conversely, the smaller the timeframe, the less important the fundamentals are, except that the release of macro data can create volatility which, on fast timeframes, can cause serious problems.
This is my humble opinion.
(1) For example, I might evaluate a certain price movement as a simple retracement because the fundamentals contextualize it that way, or as a potential beginning of a new trend because the fundamentals set it in that context.
(2) For example, if I know that based on the fundamentals (which are empirical data meant to represent reality) I have a certain perspective, but the chart ignores that perspective and continues moving in the opposite direction, I can assume that the market is behaving irrationally, and sooner or later reality will catch up with the market. In the meantime, however, you follow what the charts indicate, because - as I said - they’re the basis on which we traders place orders and set our take profits and stop losses. The important thing is to be aware of all these nuances and adjust our trading accordingly.
Keynes himself wrote: “Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.” 
I am thankful for your reply and your time; but with all respect I think this is a really unlikely thing to happen, if I would say the probability of this happening is 10% at its best and this is my reason in the picture. If I may ask, would you take this trade?
Interesting idea you have and I understand your point but again, consider that price of gold was bullish for a long time and if this wave (imagining that the wave rises to 3k) goes to correction, 2k is not impossible.
Asking if I’d make that trade doesn’t invalidate my analysis. As I’ve said several times, picking when it pops is the difficult part. It could go up to 3500 before crashing, but 3000 seems like a point where it could happen.
I wouldn’t trade this chart either, but gold did the same thing I’m suggesting
I am just pointing out my idea. but if that is your analysis and you consider a good possibility for that, it would be totally logical to enter the trade!
I am not saying this is something impossible; I am saying based on my rules of trade I would not consider a big chance for this to happen!
