Welcome to Forex-TSD!, one of the largest Forex forums worldwide, where you will be able to find the most complete and reliable Forex information imaginable.
From the list below, select the forum that you want to visit and register to post, as many times you want. It’s absolutely free. Click here for registering on Forex-TSD.
Exclusive Forum
The Exclusive Forum is the only paid section. Once you subscribe, you will get free access to real cutting-edge Trading Systems (automated and not), Indicators, Signals, Articles, etc., that will help and guide you, in ways that you could only imagine, with your Forex trading.
Elite Section
Get access to private discussions, specialized support, indicators and trading systems reported every week.
Advanced Elite Section
For professional traders, trading system developers and any other member who may need to use and/or convert, the most cutting-edge exclusive indicators and trading systems for MT4 and MT5.
I wanna thank coder's guru for this amazing EA! I think I'm going to go live with it in small lots and see how well it does if it performs anything like the backtests and forward tests etc.
perhaps all that work i did in my spreadsheets isn't wasted, it taught me how to use this tool an configure it to work for my investing goals. I feel somehow validated in my previous research with moving average strategies. I just needed the tool with enough flexibility to allow me to configure it. All the rest of the stuff you've got here the money management and the way it hedges and straddles each way. It's truly an amazing piece of work. I hope someone explains the rest of it too me some day.
like how it gets out of the opposing trade when it takes profit. I still can't grasp how it's doing it but my account history is showing it manages just fine somehow.
I hope the results continue to model the tests.
I want to thank coder's guru for his mql4 lessons too. I'm still working on wrapping my mind around the language.
This is a good strategy. I think I understand how it works. It only closes orders by it hitting the t/p . Which means the only way you would really be in jeopardy of losing money is if you started the EA at either extreme on the chart. If you started it at lowest low in recent years, then you could lose money. If you started it at the highest high in recent years then you could lose. As long as the price goes in either direction 20 pips, it's a good strategy. If the price just continues downward or upward and never retraces, then I think it's possible to lose money on it. But I think given a long enough time frame, it should be a winner.
Codersguru, nice EA. And thanks for sharing it.
I have an idea. As an adjustment to this strategy, what if we simply closed out the opposite order when the sum of the $$$ won and the amount down on the opposite is in the positive? Couldn't this actually increase our odds of a winning EA ? Seems to me this kind of EA would win in the long run about 99.9 % of the time. Your EA needs for it to retrace enough to hit the t/p but even that isn't necessary. I'm going to try to code this up but I might need help.
This strategy would work because as long as the price retraces at all which it usually does, then we would always win. Right?
This is a good strategy. I think I understand how it works. It only closes orders by it hitting the t/p . Which means the only way you would really be in jeopardy of losing money is if you started the EA at either extreme on the chart. If you started it at lowest low in recent years, then you could lose money. If you started it at the highest high in recent years then you could lose. As long as the price goes in either direction 20 pips, it's a good strategy. If the price just continues downward or upward and never retraces, then I think it's possible to lose money on it. But I think given a long enough time frame, it should be a winner.
Codersguru, nice EA. And thanks for sharing it.
I have an idea. As an adjustment to this strategy, what if we simply closed out the opposite order when the sum of the $$$ won and the amount down on the opposite is in the positive? Couldn't this actually increase our odds of a winning EA ? Seems to me this kind of EA would win in the long run about 99.9 % of the time. Your EA needs for it to retrace enough to hit the t/p but even that isn't necessary. I'm going to try to code this up but I might need help.
This strategy would work because as long as the price retraces at all which it usually does, then we would always win. Right?
I think it could be useful to your line of thought to do something like the 'basket profit' used in the divergence trader. I'll attach it below. I've got major issues with the divergence trader but I can see how the basket profit function could be used with this to help reduce the losses of something that gets left behind. There would have to be a way of identifying that a trade has been left behind and once that identification has been made then it could execute new orders like the divergence trader does to bring the accumulated loss back down and then close them both when it's down. Check out the divergence basket profit function and see if something like that would work into your damage control on this.
btw I really like your thought process, i can see what you're getting at. For what ever it's worth in my backtesting now over 300 trades it's not occured that something got left behind***..at least it's not showing up on the backtester if it did.** It looks like it's closing everything it opens....it appears perfect on the backtester, not just good but perfect. No 'valid' losses whatsoever. It's only losses are at the conclusion of the testing when it runs out of data and cannot finish the last pending trades.
**unless I'm mis-interpreting those losses on the end of the test...if indeed they are carry overs from stuff left behind in which case it's giving back alot more if the TP is higher (like 20) and less when it's lower (like 15)
***it occurs to me that there is another way to minimize the occurance of something getting left behind..that being to reduce the TP. This makes a smaller range over which it has to retrace to fill and close. I am sure that there is a statistical point of diminishing returns with the TP which if you go beyond you won't fill and close as often and your risk of "getting left on the far side of the wormhole" increases. (see the deep space nine reruns of the ferengi) As long as the greed factor is reigned in with the TP I think this will function with acceptable risk.
see reports attached...
I would have attached the EA for the EMA CROSS again just for convenience but I can only upload 5 files at a time...suffice it to say that the EA for the EMA CROSS which these reports apply to is on page 64 of this thread post #636 and #638
Here is what i'm talking about. I guess it really is a matter of probability. You need to know that a certain event happens a certain % of the time. If you know this, you can win.
Here is the EA. Feel free to play around with it. And enclosed is a document that lists price movement and probabilities. If someone comes up with something better from this, can they please share it.
It comes down to the take profit and the retrace. Where do you stop it and hope for a retrace? If you wait a long time, the probability of a retrace increases and but your winrate decreases.
I think maybe a better strategy might be to open many orders and keep track of them somehow. Many orders that buy/sell. You are always opening orders and closing them.
This strategy will only be profitable if the profit that you make on the orders that you are closing outweigh the open orders.
Here is what i'm talking about. I guess it really is a matter of probability. You need to know that a certain event happens a certain % of the time. If you know this, you can win.
Here is the EA. Feel free to play around with it. And enclosed is a document that lists price movement and probabilities. If someone comes up with something better from this, can they please share it.
It comes down to the take profit and the retrace. Where do you stop it and hope for a retrace? If you wait a long time, the probability of a retrace increases and but your winrate decreases.
I think maybe a better strategy might be to open many orders and keep track of them somehow. Many orders that buy/sell. You are always opening orders and closing them.
This strategy will only be profitable if the profit that you make on the orders that you are closing outweigh the open orders.
does this function on the same MA cross principle to drive it? Can you put user inputs for those period averages so it can be adapted to different TF?
one more idea worth exploring..weighting the lots sizes so that the opposing position is incrementally definable reduced. you know what I mean? either that or actully using the stop loss to reduce down side carrying...could/would you code these ideas today?
let's not overlook the fact of what happens on this stragety when the TP is reduced to 10 (see attached report) it DOES indeed carry the equity up with it even if it gets streached out a bit...when it closes and all is said and done it's still more than doubled it's money..with some damage control I think it could be even better. Now before you think I'm selling something reason thru this with me...
The trouble here is that this system is not fully developed. Even so with it hedging it's positions 100% (the opposing trades) it's still increasing it's equity! I think this is on to something if someone who codes has the willingness to stick to it enough to follow thru with it's development. I see alot of EA ideas here get just enough attention and development to see where they are flawed and then they get abandoned. The power of developing a system is to go deeper with tweaking it once the flaws are uncovered don't you agree? If we have a clear view of where this is failing then we have the clear view of where we can stop the bleeding. What does it tell you when the system hedges it's positions 100% with opposing positions? Doesn't have much confidence in it's signal eh? Well I think there is good evidence to have confidence in the MA Cross signal and allow it to manifest on the bottom line alot more than with 100% hedging.
If you have extra time and don't think it would split your focus I would like your opinions on this... Ask!
looking at this report http://www.forex-tsd.com/attachments...m?d=1150405516
it seems to be driving the equity up infront it rather than carrying it behind.
The mysecondstrategy.mq4 is basically the same as the "100 pips a day" strategy.
ok, do you know what I mean about strategies being unfinished? if my programming skills ever catch up with my conceptual development I'll have another full time occupation
seriously I like developing concepts. I just wish I could keep up with myself in the programming end. It's a bummer not knowing how to do this myself...yet. I guess a partially developed system is better than no system...
Hey CG, you are the most logical person I can think of to ask to upgrade this code since you wrote it initially. I have a couple other programmer friends but their priorities are not making profitable currency trading programs and I'm learning the tutorials you wrote as fast as I can but this upgrade is beyond my present coding ability. Would you please modify this and update it with the ability to scale back lot sizes for the trades which are opposite to the direction the MA CROSS predicts?
Would you add the ability to engage a function that attempts to make up losses with a basket profit feature or something like the divergence trader does once losing trades have been identified either short or long?
those two upgrades could I believe bring this already profitable system (with the right settings) up from marginally profitable to amazingly profitable.
Please don't abandon this system when there is still so much that can be done with it.
Linear Mode
