Trading Systems Leaders in this forum (automated trading systems) are winning more than 3000 pips in a month (30000$ investing one lot every time). Click here to register and get more information
Ralph,
After you understand this EA...I would be curious as to your opinion. I do not mean to put you on the spot...but if you have the time...
... being put on the spot like that, I loaded up a few experiments, backtesting only, and, well, I think there's a bit to go. It looks nice, decorating peaks blue and troughs red, on the prospect of catching the next major jump up or down.
But, is it a winner?
Well, it keeps opening trades by breach level logic, until one of a few things come about: firstly it might reach a favourable profit situation, secondly it might reach a limit to the number of trades, and thirdly it might reach a "terminal" loss situation. The first is good, the second is 50-50, and the third is bad.
By design, the third won't happen without the second, because while new trades can be added in the most recent price move direction, the EA does so, and thereby it changes the effective trade size and direction. (No need to redo the math ).
It seems the trade limit has two reasons: either reaching the set count of trades, or reaching as many trades as margin allows. The count of trades is also tied to an optional force closing, while a margin limit merely makes the EA sit and wait for an eventual win or loss.
Perhaps the force close option should apply to margin limit as well? The exits would then be either profitable or the 50-50 force close, which perhaps would make it statistically a 50-50 machine, though tunable to lean towards winning for finite time and a sub set of potential price move histories.
Ok, so it's easy to be critical, and to shine of pretentious wisdom without having trialled all, or most, even, of the options. That's what you get when you ask for it
would you consider trialling this sort of EA? (I am pushing my luck)
ES
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph.ronnquist
... being put on the spot like that, I loaded up a few experiments, backtesting only, and, well, I think there's a bit to go. It looks nice, decorating peaks blue and troughs red, on the prospect of catching the next major jump up or down.
But, is it a winner?
Well, it keeps opening trades by breach level logic, until one of a few things come about: firstly it might reach a favourable profit situation, secondly it might reach a limit to the number of trades, and thirdly it might reach a "terminal" loss situation. The first is good, the second is 50-50, and the third is bad.
By design, the third won't happen without the second, because while new trades can be added in the most recent price move direction, the EA does so, and thereby it changes the effective trade size and direction. (No need to redo the math ).
It seems the trade limit has two reasons: either reaching the set count of trades, or reaching as many trades as margin allows. The count of trades is also tied to an optional force closing, while a margin limit merely makes the EA sit and wait for an eventual win or loss.
Perhaps the force close option should apply to margin limit as well? The exits would then be either profitable or the 50-50 force close, which perhaps would make it statistically a 50-50 machine, though tunable to lean towards winning for finite time and a sub set of potential price move histories.
Ok, so it's easy to be critical, and to shine of pretentious wisdom without having trialled all, or most, even, of the options. That's what you get when you ask for it
would you consider starting a new thread for PipIdiot™.
I would like to take it live when your finished with it.
I will tell you why I am willing to take it live...It is constantly using 0.02 lots...and I can start with 2K in a low spread pair like EUR/USD and last forever and I am convinced it will yield more than a CD. If I near a max margin situation, I can simply add 2K more and last another 6 months as there is no martingaling...
I hope that you start the new thread as I want to reference this work in my Live Account Journal at my Forum.
The current thread has nothing to do with its title and TFX 1.8 deserves its space as it has martingaling available.
ES
Last edited by ElectricSavant; 03-04-2008 at 12:16 AM.
would you consider trialling this sort of EA? (I am pushing my luck)
ES
... when don't you?
It'd all depend on the purpose, of course, but I can't say I'm very convinced about its potential. The method feels too much of "focus on the positive and ignore the negative" to me to be a practical alternative for automated trading.
Maybe this unveils my virtually non-existent trading skill rather than saying anything about the EA.
by the way ...IBFX does not allow any traders to have more than 1,000 trades open and/or pending at one time...no matter if you have a standard or mini account and no matter if you have margin available and no matter what leverage they have given you...So this is good information for this type of EA, since it is an idiot. ☺
ES☺
Last edited by ElectricSavant; 03-04-2008 at 12:17 AM.
wolfe...Please ask ralph how the EA can close several hunderd orders more efficiently...
Ralph..wolfey prolly' does not want to bother you...if you have time could you help him code the "close-all" routine?
Not sure there is a better way to close SEVERAL HUNDRED orders instantly, without any slippage.
With a small TP using WFM or simply a regular TP, while in the closing process, the price could move on a hundred orders against you before you have completed Close_All. This shift in price can bury your small TP.
Ralph,
If you know a better way to close hundreds of orders, I want to learn from you!
I also noticed despite WFM settings, total closed profits were negative amounts (?) in two cycles. Maybe closing multiple orders at once has to be looked at, I think.
Yes, anyone know a better way to close multiple orders without slippage in price?
).
☺
Linear Mode
