Why use a percent at all?....It is not efficient, unless you were to increase exposure..

I believe the EA currently is using a percent of balance as you describe....errr......... or not?

ES

Wolfe,

Would it be possible to code the EA with an optional switch to manage all the open trades if multiple currency pairs are traded? I would use TP & SL % on the starting balance.

Thanks,
LCFX

Wow...that would be a lot of open trades for the EA to get closed before the next tick opening them right back up again...

sheeesh...there must be some sort of delay these coders use..

I do not know what strategy you are using LCFX, but you got me curious...

Being that the EA finds its direction, correlations or lack thereof cannot be of any help....

ES

ES,

How else would you set the TP or SL if the positions sizes are constantly changing? Help me to see your side of it. Let's work as a team. By all means anyone reading this please speak up.

Thanks,
LCFX

LCFX,

Doesn't everybody use banked balance? That does not change until you exit...and with this EA you usually exit with a profit, if you buy yourself enough time.

Each individual entry does not have a TP or SL as you know. This is a global thing FOR THE INSTRUMENT THE EA IS DRAGGED ON ONLY. If you simply re-enter after taking profit without interuppting or stopping the restart of the EA and making changes to the start lot and the increment, then you have the exact same progression with the same exposure...but if your profit went up with the previous trade you would be unneccesarily increasing the take profit and the SL. A fixed dollar setting needs to be set per 1K for example...thats easy enough...this is not rocket science...BUT VERY IMPORTANT WHEN YOU ADJUST THE SL OR TP YOU NEED TO ADJUST THE START AND INCREMENT...IF YOU WAIT FOR DOUBLING THEN I SUGGEST YOU DOUBLE BOTH SIDES (The exposure and the sl /tp). LCFX, I understand your need to make this automatic/dynamic with a percent, but it cannot apply here as this multiple progression entry system is not easy to include a MM routine....I will reiterate, clean up the code and get rid of the percent choice completely.

There is absolutly no reason to use this EA on multiple instruments as there is not a strategic reason to do so, other than a long only or short only strategy set up on each individual pair...and why do that with the logic that this EA has? If you absolutly must use just one platform to get the multi-currency exposure you seek after I suggest 0.01 Start / 0.01 increment per pair per 1k...and you better get the nexttrade input calibrated to ATR for each individual pair. Don't forget to change the magic number.

This EA seems to be able to find its direction from price alone...it does not really need the MA to choose it's first trade entry in my opinion...clutters the code...You will never just enter once and get a hole-in-one...with this EA, unless you use a large start lot size. and if you use a large lotsize together with a small increment you unnecessarily start out with a weighting that would require a very "long-lasting increment set of trades" to find its direction...

LCFX, TY for this opportunity to post with you. Hope this explains my thoughts...

ES

If you wish to trade multiple instruments I would suggest an additional MT4 platform for each instrument as there is no valid reason to slow down float with multiliple instruments with this "multi-directional on the fly EA" and how it functions. Usually the reasoning for multiple instruments is to slow down float within one platform.

ES

I have a bad habit with late edits...i write and write and write...I try to proofread b4 I hit submit...but then there is so much more I want to add...

Please re-read.

ES

I think you are misunderstanding this EA...Position size changes are simply a reaction to the market direction for that instrument...it is trying to find it's way...its direction....the buys and sells are cancelling each other until it can start pyramiding in a trend giving it directional weight to find it's conservative TP... (2.5% of banked, exposure adjusted per 1K)

ES

ES,

I understand it because I am the one who sent it to Wolfe for coding.

In your example:

Are you saying use a TP (ex: 8pips) for each order and next trade setting say around 10 pips that would increase the lot size for each order that way your banked amount will always be greater than the draw down in the floating trades once the trend is in place? If I am off base here, please show an example with numbers.

Thanks, LCFX

LCFX...I am your science teacher!

Folks...I cannot communicate ...help me out here...

class...speak up...

ES