You can hold a short position by repeatedly borrowing more stock – but you run the risk of running out of money completely, because short positions have (theoretically) infinite downside risk.
Financial risks can, by themselves, never be infinite. They are by nature quite finite. Also, risks are always alluding to a downside. Otherwise they’re called chances.
Granted. “Arbitrarily large” would probably be a better phrasing: if I buy a stock for $100 and the value drops to $0, I’m out $100. Can’t lose more money than I put in. What I meant is that short positions, by their nature, don’t have this ceiling on the amount of money you lose.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
You can hold a short position by repeatedly borrowing more stock – but you run the risk of running out of money completely, because short positions have (theoretically) infinite downside risk.
Financial risks can, by themselves, never be infinite. They are by nature quite finite. Also, risks are always alluding to a downside. Otherwise they’re called chances.
Granted. “Arbitrarily large” would probably be a better phrasing: if I buy a stock for $100 and the value drops to $0, I’m out $100. Can’t lose more money than I put in. What I meant is that short positions, by their nature, don’t have this ceiling on the amount of money you lose.