Trading without a stop loss - page 3

New comment
 
noorad2000:

only backtest not forward test 

thank you.

would you please paste graph from 2013.01.01 until now . back test

thank you.

i am waiting Intensively !

 
noorad2000:

only backtest not forward test  

Nice.

In this case, SL does not play a big role, as you shown, but money management / lot size is, obviously, crucial :)

Just look at the biggest lost, in the end of the graph, it would be even bigger (or smaller), only depending on Lots Size choosen for latest trades :)

If too bigger size of Lots in Consecutive Losses of Trades, can vanish all the well-done work before.

By a firts look, a loss is about from 53000 to 44000,  circa 1/5.5 (2/11) or 18% circa of the whole positive progress on balance; it just with few trades at the end (without considering the nice recovery, later..)

In other words, just a couple of few trades at the end, vanished the hard-work of the first 0 to 30-40 trades circa, initially, for example.

That is because of SL and Money Management, but nobody can say how the graph can be changed if you use SL or change trading parameters..

 

So, by picture, grossly a loss of circa 18% or 9000$ with few trades at the end..   If you would have traded with Lot Size widened(that was bigger by) 10% you would have 9000+10% loss = 9900$ instead of 9000$.

Worse, if lots was widened by 50%, instead of 9000$ the loss would be 13500$   and suddenly if the lots was of doubled kind (100%, for example from trades consisted of 1 lot size, hypothetically as in picture, was of 2 lots size), from 9000$ to 18000$ loss, almost 1/3 of the account, burnt with just few trades at the end (still, i'm not considering the nice recovery later).

So, by this gross reasoning,  it's always relative..     

No serious judice can be done with just this picture.

I'm not saying that your graph is bad, it looks wonderful, :))

but i'm saying that, still, personally, i'm against trading without some kind of SL :) 

 

 ---------------

 

I think, you know what you are doing, saying and sustaining about your ideas. 

So i invite you, if you want, to give future proof of your ideas, by using the comfortably Signals opportunity,

and all of us would be wondered about when wonderful trading, or confirm general idea that trading without SL, is little bit risky. :-) 

 
Harvester:

Nice.

In this case, SL does not play a big role, as you shown, but money management / lot size is, obviously, crucial :)

Just look at the biggest lost, in the end of the graph, it would be even bigger (or smaller), only depending on Lots Size choosen for latest trades :)

If too bigger size of Lots in Consecutive Losses of Trades, can vanish all the well-done work before.

By a firts look, a loss is about from 53000 to 44000,  circa 1/5.5 (2/11) or 18% circa of the whole positive progress on balance; it just with few trades at the end (without considering the nice recovery, later..)

In other words, just a couple of few trades at the end, vanished the hard-work of the first 0 to 30-40 trades circa, initially, for example.

That is because of SL and Money Management, but nobody can say how the graph can be changed if you use SL or change trading parameters..

 

So, by picture, grossly a loss of circa 18% or 9000$ with few trades at the end..   If you would have traded with Lot Size widened(that was bigger by) 10% you would have 9000+10% loss = 9900$ instead of 9000$.

Worse, if lots was widened by 50%, instead of 9000$ the loss would be 13500$   and suddenly if the lots was of doubled kind (100%, for example from trades consisted of 1 lot size, hypothetically as in picture, was of 2 lots size), from 9000$ to 18000$ loss, almost 1/3 of the account, burnt with just few trades at the end (still, i'm not considering the nice recovery later).

So, by this gross reasoning,  it's always relative..     

No serious judice can be done with just this picture.

I'm not saying that your graph is bad, it looks wonderful, :))

but i'm saying that, still, personally, i'm against trading without some kind of SL :) 

 

 ---------------

 

I think, you know what you are doing, saying and sustaining about your ideas. 

So i invite you, if you want, to give future proof of your ideas, by using the comfortably Signals opportunity,

and all of us would be wondered about when wonderful trading, or confirm general idea that trading without SL, is little bit risky. :-) 

You are very intelligent., And thanks for you help.

You are right because my EA is a problem in actual market 

 
noorad2000:

You are right because my EA is a problem in actual market 

you mean: " my EA have a problem in actual market " ?             ( is it correct ? )

and can you please answer to above ?

TIMisthebest 2013.06.01 15:30 #
noorad2000:

only backtest not forward test 

thank you.

would you please paste graph from 2013.01.01 until now . back test

thank you.

i am waiting Intensively !

thank you.

 
noorad2000:

You are very intelligent., And thanks for you help.

You are right because my EA is a problem in actual market 

Thanks, but i'm far from be very intelligent.

 

The "help" is only about because you asked our opinion about trading without Stop Loss, and the general answer was

that is very risky, for some obvious, confirmed, reasons. 

But nobody prevent you to do whatever you want to do with your trading, also without SL, it can be possible

if you know how to being ever-profitable or you have successful ideas tested.

Your curve of Balance looks nice, so you are welcome to progress with your study.

 

Speaking for myself, i already tried, at the "early" stage of my activity.. to trading without SL, and resulted in obvious destroy of the account,

because, adverse market direction, soon or later, happen (unless one have a crystal ball :D )

 

If you want trade without "absolutely" (relatively...) SL, you need to charge your account of Million of USD and open positions of 0.01,

in such case is sure you have a so-big margin, to cover every market adverse condition, (even the "impossible" EURUSD 1:1.0000 (1 usd for buy 1 eur) or 1:2.0000 (2 usd to buy 1 eur))

and wait until, it "return again" as you say. Without Margin-Call, is expected the market "return" because it moves in a range, at least up to now :)    Future we can't know about international monetary and never-seen conditions :)   But is improbable..   Nothing can be said about. 

But the "without SL", is not "trading" i meant for..   

Trading i looking for, is little profits, but constants in time, and minimizing the losses, and do include SL and TP all the times.   

This is just my opinion )) 

Good luck!! 

 

I am assuming you are on demo which makes one as fearless as a tiger on heat ?

 
noorad2000:

 HI Please tell the chart below

You can successfully trade without stop loss but not in the long run. Do you believe you can trade 5 years without stop loss and survive? One day you'll open a trade and it immediately goes in the opposite direction and never comes back till almost all your money is eaten.
 
tonny:
You can successfully trade without stop loss but not in the long run. Do you believe you can trade 5 years without stop loss and survive? One day you'll open a trade and it immediately goes in the opposite direction and never comes back till almost all your money is eaten.
There are many methods of exiting a trade other than a SL,  aren't there ?
 
obviously there are. :) The point is not the SL itself, but the Stopping of Losses OR Stopping of Profits :)
 
Harvester:
obviously there are. :) The point is not the SL itself, but the Stopping of Losses OR Stopping of Profits :)
Yes,  but when someone says "trading without a stop loss" do they mean trading without setting a SL or do they mean having no method of exiting a trade when it is in drawdown other than a margin call ?  it important to understand the question being asked  
123456
New comment