Trimming For Risk Versus Trimming For View
Two different reasons to cut a position size — because the position has grown too large or risky, versus because your conviction in the trade itself has weakened — that get muddled if not kept explicit.
"Trim the position" can mean two quite different things, and mixing them up leads to muddled decision-making. Trimming for risk means the position itself is unchanged in quality — your view on the trade hasn't budged — but it has grown too large relative to the book, perhaps because the stock rallied and its dollar exposure or volatility contribution now exceeds a limit. Trimming for view means the opposite: the size might still be within limits, but something has changed your confidence in the thesis, so a smaller position is now the right size for the amount of conviction you actually have.
The distinction matters because the two calls should be re-evaluated on different triggers. A risk-driven trim should be revisited whenever the position's size relative to the book changes again — it can be added back once it shrinks relative to the portfolio, with no change in view required. A view-driven trim should only be reversed if the thesis itself is reconfirmed, regardless of what the position's dollar size happens to be doing. Treating a risk trim as if it were a view downgrade (or vice versa) leads to either re-adding to a trade you no longer believe in, or leaving a good trade under-sized long after the risk constraint that trimmed it has passed.
A risk trim cuts size because the position got too big for the book with the view unchanged; a view trim cuts size because conviction fell. Keeping the two labeled separately determines when — and whether — the position should be re-added.
Related concepts
Further reading
- Common practice among discretionary and systematic position managers