So far this week – and so far this year – we’ve seen incredible volatility in the stock market.

Whenever a stock in our Oxford Trading Portfolio pulls back 25% from its closing high – or from our original entry point – we issue an alert advising members to sell the stock at market.

Why do we depend on using trailing stops? Because they keep us from selling our stocks while they’re in a major uptrend – and prevent small losses from becoming unacceptable losses.

It’s true that many of these are great companies that will bounce back eventually. But “eventually” can be a long time. Our policy is not to argue with the market.

We buy based primarily on the near-term business prospects for our recommended companies. But we understand, too, that changes in fundamentals are immediately reflected in share prices. So that’s where we base our sell decisions.

Adhere To Your Trailing Stops, No Exceptions!

If we don’t adhere to our trailing stops and start making exceptions, our system will break down. And then – like so many investors – we’ll simply be flying by the seat of our pants, hoping our stocks will continue to rise… or stop falling.

I know some members object, especially if they have faith in a company…

• But you can’t bank on size and strength. Enron was the seventh-largest company in the United States.
• You can’t always depend on quality, either. At one time, WorldCom had the most impressive array of telecom assets on the planet.
• Nor will longevity protect you. Montgomery Ward was profitable for 100 years before declaring bankruptcy.

However, if time passes and we recognize that we stopped out of a company due primarily to market volatility and not business fundamentals, we will often recommend the stock again.

Using Trailing Stops – The True Art of Knowing When To Sell

But it’s important to have a sell discipline and stick with it. Using trailing stops and knowing when to sell a stock is the true art of investing… Anyone can buy a stock.

In a study recently published in The Journal of Portfolio Management, Christophe Faugere, Hany A. Shawky and David M. Smith – finance professors at the State University of New York at Albany – researched the performance of money managers who oversee pension funds, endowments and high-net-worth accounts.

Because most institutions work under strict investment guidelines, these academics were able to analyze performance based on differing approaches to selling stocks.

The result? Institutional managers who fared best were those with restrictive rules that did not allow leeway for hanging on to stocks for emotional reasons. The managers who relied on “flexible” sell strategies did far worse.

That’s unsurprising, really. When institutional investors see a stock moving against them, they are just as likely to rationalize as individual investors. And the culprit is always the same: pride, ego or emotion.

Trailing Stops – A Non-Emotional Sell Strategy

As Greg Forsythe, Director of the equity model development team at Charles Schwab, said recently, “Without any kind of sell strategy [e.g. trailing stops], emotions come into play. And emotions are almost always wrong.”

We recognize that our timing will never be perfect. (No investment system devised will ever beat the uncanny accuracy of hindsight.)

But, in our view, market prices generally reflect the prospects for a business better than “expert opinions.”

Using trailing stops protects both your profits and your principal. Not only by taking the emotion out of the investment process, but by basing your sell decisions on the realities of the market.

That can’t help but make you a more successful investor.

Source: Selling: The True Art of Investing

However, Sovereign Society Investment Director Eric Roseman says that by singling out 19 firms, the SEC has left hundreds more financial companies even more vulnerable. Washington Mutual (NYSE:WM), the largest US bank not included in the list, saw its share price plunge 35% last week.

Besides, poor financial supervision and weak government regulation created this mess in the banking sector, not short-selling hedge funds.

Bear markets tend to rear the government’s ugly head. In my book, the less government intervenes, the better. Markets should be allowed to function freely, as long as market participants use transparent reporting.

Sometimes, however, the government has to intervene when investors are unfairly punished or defrauded. This was the case earlier this decade during the Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, and the Spitzer mutual fund-timing scandals. Millions of investors were victimized, defrauded, and CEOs were subsequently sentenced or heavily fined.

But now the rules are about to change. It looks like short-sellers are the new target in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

In an effort to curb speculation in financial services stocks, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have introduced new short-selling rules for the next 30 days. These changes bar institutions, mainly hedge funds, from shorting financial stocks. The government has issued a list of 19 commercial and investment banks that cannot be shorted.

The SEC, announced these new rules last Tuesday after financial stocks plummeted for the second day. This announcement triggered a massive 17% rally for the bank index on Wednesday. The new short-sale rule was probably the biggest single factor contributing to the rally.

So will this new rule help financial stocks and their devastated shareholders? The answer is probably not.

Though the government has identified 19 financial institutions to be protected, this leaves a few hundred more that remain even more vulnerable as a result of this legislation.

Also, hedge funds and other speculators will find alternative targets. If a financial stock deserves to be priced lower, then it should trade at a discount to other more profitable companies. By isolating 19 companies, the SEC has invited vultures to the party as hundreds more are now fresh targets that are not protected by the 30-day rule.

Don’t blame the hedge funds for the woes afflicting the financials. The real blame falls on poor financial supervision, poor government regulation, and rogue CEOs that went absolutely wild issuing mortgages to sub-par applicants.

And don’t forget Wall Street. Investment banks, the largest of which are now protected by the Feds with the new short-selling rules, where the largest issuers and innovators of mortgage-backed securities tied to synthetic derivatives.

Source: What the SEC Really Accomplished with Their New ‘Short-Sell’ Rule