Sentences with phrase «risk ratio too»

Also, I would shoot for a 3:1 reward to risk ratio too.

Not exact matches

As in developed markets, if the yield is too high, or if the payout ratio doesn't leave room for reinvestment, there is a risk the dividend could get cut.

Opening new trades at the current levels involves taking on too much risk with minimal upside potential (negative reward - risk ratio).

Although it obviously may have been better to buy on the actual day of the June 14 gap up, this ETF is still not too far gone to provide a decent buy entry with a positive reward - risk ratio.

However, after three days in a row of big gains, the price action became too extended in the short - term to provide a positive risk - reward ratio.

I say that because I get a lot of emails from traders telling me they can't get a proper 1:2 or more risk reward ratio because there are too many support or resistance levels in the way.

If you want to factor in the risk of a pick being a bust, you have to include that risk for the pick you acquire too, meaning the cost ratios remain the same regardless — it may only cost us 2 starters, but we're only getting 1/2 a starting QB in return (which can just as easily round down to nothing as round up to 1).

But when they looked at waist circumference and waist - to - hip ratio alone — not just overall weight — they found that those factors were strongly associated with a higher mortality risk too.

«It can change debt ratios, change your interest rate (which may also kill your mortgage approval), and even lead to a lender deciding you have too much debt and (you are) not worth the risk anymore.»

In other words, if the amount of the mortgage is too high in a direct ratio to how much it's worth, there is too high of a risk for the lender to take on.

Here are 3 risks of relying too heavily on p / e ratios.

But relying too heavily on these financial ratios can expose you to serious risk.

If you are not sure how much risk to assume, read Howard Hayes» article on this same subject where he talks about how sometimes a debt service ratio of 20 % to 30 % can be too much.

I say that because I get a lot of emails from traders telling me they can't get a proper 1:2 or more risk reward ratio because there are too many support or resistance levels in the way.

«Your «debt - to - income ratio» will be deemed too high, and mortgage issuers will consider you at high risk for a future default.»

As mentioned above, if you have too much debt, have poor credit, or your debt - to - income ratio is too high, most lenders will consider you too great a risk and be leery of taking a chance on you repaying the loan.

Convertibles & other types of preference capital are somewhat similar (and some companies include them in leverage ratios)-- arguably they're equity / non-callable liabilities, but they also increase risk / leverage for ordinary shareholders, so the same haircut's acceptable here too.

Here are 3 risks of relying too heavily on P / E ratios.

To my mind, all of the above are reasons why the risk / reward ratio for law firm political donations is frequently too high to make it a prudent part of law firm marketing strategy.