Great EA in backtest! - page 107
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
My support and resistance development is coming along well...I've made some improvements on top of the EA I posted. Bottomline I now CAN generate horizontal support/resistance levels which also indicate relative strength of those lines...Now I just have to figure out how to make a filter using that information.... also...note to self...give attention to the cyberia dynamic trailing stop so that it can be used to manage manually entered trades AND leave them alone.
This may not be the cause of your manual trade problem but this is a problem nevertheless. In your DynamicTrailStop routine
if(OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
should be
if(OrderSymbol() == Symbol() && OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
PS. Fantastic effort you have put in here.
This may not be the cause of your manual trade problem but this is a problem nevertheless. In your DynamicTrailStop routine
if(OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
should be
if(OrderSymbol() == Symbol() && OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
PS. Fantastic effort you have put in here.Thanks, yes it is pretty amazing...I didn't know I could do it either.
will this change be enough to keep it from changing other orders in the same pair which are placed manually?
if I place a manual trade on the same pair the symbol will match will it not? So if that is the case and the previous version of ...
if(OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
is not sufficient to keep it from trailing manual orders then how will what you suggest prevent it from trailing manual orders? Seem to me like its got to do something like....
if(OrderMagicNumber() != MagicNumber)
{
Allow = False;
}
if(Allow && OrderSymbol() == Symbol() && OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
{
blah..
blah..
modify order...
Allow = True;
}I got this...
two years though... (since 2004 to 2006)
(Cyberia Trader1.85g jpy) on EUR.USD... I changed some parameteres...
Thanks, yes it is pretty amazing...I didn't know I could do it either.
will this change be enough to keep it from changing other orders in the same pair which are placed manually?
if I place a manual trade on the same pair the symbol will match will it not? So if that is the case and the previous version of ...
if(OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
is not sufficient to keep it from trailing manual orders then how will what you suggest prevent it from trailing manual orders? Seem to me like its got to do something like....
if(OrderMagicNumber() != MagicNumber)
{
Allow = False;
}
if(Allow && OrderSymbol() == Symbol() && OrderMagicNumber() == MagicNumber && TrailingStop > 0)
{
blah..
blah..
modify order...
Allow = True;
}The Allow mod should be unnecessary. As long as your manual magic number is not the same everything should be fine. What may have been happening before is your manual magic number may have been the same as a magic number on a different pair. For example, if you had the EA running on USDJPY with magic number 123456, then it would have been controlling any order on any pair with magic number 123456. So if you had EURUSD EA with magic number 123457 and a manual trade EURUSD with magic number 123456, the manual trade would have been controlled by the EA on USDJPY. The change I proposed will stop that. As long as the magic numbers are distinct per symbol, no further changes should be needed.
R2 AlertEuro
This vesrsion includes the ability to allow cyberia's dynamic trailing stop to manage manually placed orders on the same currency pair. It also double checks to insure that when you DON'T want cyberia's dynamic trailing stop to manage a manually placed order that it won't interfere with manual orders on the same pair. I have not tested this code in live or demo. So use it at your own risk until we have verified that it's working correctly. This should take care of the former problem and give some added functional control which is what I always like...
If you want to create your own version revisions feel free. I'm by no means the last word on how this should work.
This is the version I'm going to go with starting off this week.
I for one would subsidise your developing if you could put a sound alert on this thing.
I just realized that I only put the alert on the openings. did you also want an alert when it closes positions?
Daylight Savings
Looks like New York is off daylight savings now, so news times would now be 9,10,13,15 GMT
I gotta tell ya, I love waking up in the morning to see that this EA has made money while I slept. I have seen it do that now for a couple weeks at least.
I allow this to run 24/7 as long as the market is open I keep the euro version I posted going. I figure that anything that makes more than it loses deserves a place in my portfolio. This is proving itself very reliable. When i have lost money it's been more because I have ignored money management rules in using it, and overleveraged by adding manual trades. I have one other idea to look at some more stringent CCI parameters to see if I can make it better that way...and I'm working on the support resistance code which isn't finished yet but I have good hopes that will improve it too.
In the mean time the question on my mind is how much margin to allow the program access too? Not IF I will allow it to run in my account but HOW LARGE will I allow it to use my account? Last night still stinging from my losses I reduced the risk=.25 and the position it won overnight was .61 minilots. The more I feel like the forward test validates the backtest the more willing I am to give it larger positions. My doubts about it doing that are diminishing. Have we not all seen it model pretty closely forward what it does backtesting? Maybe not all of us but the majority of us seem to be proving that don't we?
For me it's still trying to resolve the fear/greed equation and find a balance that works for me. My account is now $314.93 and I'm letting it trade with risk=0.3 and symbolcount=2. I expect that will take it's next position somewhere around .90 minilots making it .90 cents a pip. My greed tells me to lot go and trust it more like letting it risk=2 and get $2/pip. I'm afraid of that though so my fear tempers my greed but my greed fights back too. As the bears and bulls fight so does my own fear and greed conflict. I'm just like a guy fully engaged watching a football game, cheering the wins and booing the losses. I want that yardage, I want to win.
The winning here seems to be making those 1st downs over and over more than the break away touch down, or the long bomb touch down pass. This EA simply marches down the field and I just need to determine how many yards/play I can live with and balance my own fear/greed while it does it's thing. If I leave either side out of the equation then I'm tempted to interfere with it and I've seen that give me losses.
I have no hesitation however about continuing to develop and backtest new filters and settings. Seeing that the forward tests really do approximate the backtests gives me alot of incentive to pursue it.
I am doing a comparision of my live account which is now only running the alerteuro version and the demo account which I am allowing to run the alert euro AND the usdcad AND the usdjpy version all of which I posted earlier in the thread...of the three the usdjpy is by far the most active, and it also is by far the least profitable, it seems to barely do more than break even and sometimes loses alot. I wanted to see if the three pairs together would make more or less than just the euro itself would make which is the most reliable result I see so far.
I'm still learning more about this EA too. There's alot to it...I can see where it's determining it's probability for each bar and also saving that when a new bar is evaluated it looks back at the previous bar's probability decision. That isn't exactly trend following but it does approximate trend following. I haven't delved into that part of the code yet to see how many bars back it looks. It's just interesting to learn more about it's logic.
My working theory at this point is to use support and resistance to filter thru and enhance money management decisions since that's MY weak point.
Hi!,
What version of Cyberia you are using?
Hi!, What version of Cyberia you are using?
it is just to look back on past posts...