A long-term trend which may have developed over several months may look huge on a price chart. The price in an individual stock may have appreciated 100% - maybe more. And that's great. A lot of traders trumpet their own trades in this manner. But that's not what I'm interested in.
Take for example a stock that moves up 100% over the course of a year. The entry was at $50 and went up to $100. In that period where will have been some price movements against that main trend - some bigger than others. So, to stay in a trade for that length of time, it is more than likely that the initial stop and exit parameters are quite loose, to allow for this price fluctuation or 'noise'. The initial stop was placed at $40.
Next, look at a stock which gave an entry signal at $10 and moved up 30% in a few weeks, before generating an exit signal at $13. Nowhere near as spectacular, I hear you say. But then I tell you that the initial stop was placed only 50c away from entry.
So, which is the better trade - the one where price moved 100%, or the one that moved only 30%? I'll let you do the maths.