10points 3.mq4 - page 77
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
This optimizeischan wit 0.01 lot
snif snif don't forget the mini account (not micro) !!!
Hi all !
i already lost money in live trading with this EA but i think it is a real good EA cause the logic behind the EA is great.
My only concern is that my live account is a mini account (with 0.1 lot and leverage of 200).
So it's really risky and i already lost money because of marging call.
Do you think ther's a way to adapt the EA for small account (i had about 1 000 $) with mini lot ?
I guess no, even one of the idea is (imho) to increase the pipstep (no 15 but 100 for example).
If you have an idea don't hesitate.
10Point 3 Dynamic Stop
I've tested the 10point 3 dynamic stop for a week now after backtesting and seeing some amazing results. Well, it started well for first two days but then trashed my demo account very quickly after that. The system seems to fire multiple buy signals in a clear downtrend and vice versa. I plotted the ASC trend indicacator to compare and 10point3 was buying on a clear ASC sell, not wise, as i found that asc has beedn the most consistant indicator to date. (just a pity the the ASC trend EA does not match the ASC indicator!)The system needs to be adapted so that it fires multiple buys in an uptrend and sells in a downtrend which would yield better results. Any system that has a reverse risk / reward ratio is doomed to failure in the long term, i.e. you need at least 3 winners to 1 loser on any system to keep you in the game long term. 10point 3 seems to take up to 5x trades all with a 65pip stop but has a profit objective of only 20 to 40 pips, depending on your settings. Anyway, my two cents worth. TQC.....The Quest Continues..;-)
This optimizeischan wit 0.1 lot
from 1 year
@daet
The strategy behind these EA's is simple, risky and profitable. It is not important to which way the market runs. The EA gets in small profit if the direction was correct, but it gets normally in bigger profit if the market direction goes against your trades. Then the EA invests money as long as the retracement of the contrary movement occurs.
It is like playing roulette-black-red-strategy. F.e. you bet only on red - if you loose - you double your bet amount ( next trade) - you loose again and you double again - and so on - until the colour turns on red and you win ( retracement), your money sack is empty ( margin call) or you decide to stop ( stop loss).
A little different to roulette and key of this EA is, that you have a "certain" probability in fx market that even a small retracment takes place when you lie with your trades on the wrong direction. On roullette - who says that there is not 20x times black comming along - while you are doubleing and doubleing....
So it is very important to have good settings and a "stop loss" for the trades and your account.
mibl
@daet
The strategy behind these EA's is simple, risky and profitable. It is not important to which way the market runs. The EA gets in small profit if the direction was correct, but it gets normally in bigger profit if the market direction goes against your trades. Then the EA invests money as long as the retracement of the contrary movement occurs.
It is like playing roulette-black-red-strategy. F.e. you bet only on red - if you loose - you double your bet amount ( next trade) - you loose again and you double again - and so on - until the colour turns on red and you win ( retracement), your money sack is empty ( margin call) or you decide to stop ( stop loss).
A little different to roulette and key of this EA is, that you have a "certain" probability in fx market that even a small retracment takes place when you lie with your trades on the wrong direction. On roullette - who says that there is not 20x times black comming along - while you are doubleing and doubleing....
So it is very important to have good settings and a "stop loss" for the trades and your account.
miblI agree with your comment except that in roulette the odds are exactly the same with each roll (38 to 2 in American casinos) but with this EA the opportunity for a "win" is increased in that it doesn't need to make precisely the same retracement each roll. At the start of the sequence it requires 20TP (in my settings) but later can "win" with 10TP when the overall profit is covered. So the odds are improved with the EA over the Roulette table.
Just the same it is a dangerous EA as many in this thread have testified
so it has to be handled with care and time taken to optimise it's settings. I believe that when using a live account it is vital not to use MM1 but rather make money at the very basic level and only increase the initial start off after the original funds are removed.
After testing this EA since August I believe that the higher the MaxTrades that the account can stand with the lowest setting that the broker will allow is the key to success and if the broker will not allow .01 find one that will.
I have had MaxTrades7 go against me when Account Protection kicked in but if that had been allowed to progress up to MaxTrades10 it would have closed off successfully.
This latest idea of using MaxTrades13 at 1.5 progression should make this EA closer to unbeatable providing the account can withstand a potential $1225.50 loss on the losing trades whilst still trading the other pairs. This week will prove to be very interesting, I am testing 2 versions of 10points and 2 different Goblin EAs.
John
hello
can someone code for me to use MACD 3 Lines as entry signal? cross between MA will be entry. then we martingale it.
Thanks
Mibl
Mibl, this is why most people lose at Roulette, it's been shown statistically that one should rather bet WITH the trend and double those bets as the trend works in your favour vs the Martingale stratagy. The problem with an EA that has a PT=40 and SL=100 or 300 (in some EA's) is that you have a long line of winners and only a single trade to set you back to the beginning or even worse, losses. Is there an EA that agressively buys on a confirmed trend with a 2:1 or 3:1 risk reward stratagy.? I'm having good success with with the ASC trend indicator and using a williams %R as a stop, it's not without it's losss of course but at least i'm working with the trend.
I agree with your comment except that in roulette the odds are exactly the same with each roll (38 to 2 in American casinos) but with this EA the opportunity for a "win" is increased in that it doesn't need to make precisely the same retracement each roll. At the start of the sequence it requires 20TP (in my settings) but later can "win" with 10TP when the overall profit is covered. So the odds are improved with the EA over the Roulette table.
....
This latest idea of using MaxTrades13 at 1.5 progression should make this EA closer to unbeatable providing the account can withstand a potential $1225.50 loss on the losing trades whilst still trading the other pairs. This week will prove to be very interesting, I am testing 2 versions of 10points and 2 different Goblin EAs.
JohnIf you switch over to 1.5 progression your first argument on SecureProfit is no longer correct.
Take a quick view on the following (regarding a mini account, round up to a valid lotsize a little more that 1.5 and spreads are ignored in this model):
trade / lotsize => overall pips on closing on a retracement of 17 pips
#1 / 0.1 => -43 * 1 = -43
#2 / 0.2 => -28 * 2 = -56
#3 / 0.3 => -13 * 3 = -39
#4 / 0.5 => +2 * 5 = +10
#5 / 0.8 => +17 * 8 = +136 ==> total +8 pips
trade / lotsize => overall pips on closing on a retracement of 18 pips
#1 / 0.1 => -42 * 1 = -42
#2 / 0.2 => -27 * 2 = -54
#3 / 0.3 => -12 * 3 = -36
#4 / 0.5 => +3 * 5 = +15
#5 / 0.8 => +18 * 8 = +144 ==> total +27 pips
=> Using 5 trades drawdown (out of Maxtrades) you need a move of 18 pips to overstep SecureProfit of 10.
trade / lotsize => overall pips on closing on a retracement of 19 pips
#1 / 0.1 => -58 * 1 = -58
#2 / 0.2 => -43 * 2 = -86
#3 / 0.3 => -28 * 3 = -84
#4 / 0.5 => -13 * 5 = -65
#5 / 0.8 => +4 * 8 = +32
#6 / 1.2 => +19 * 12 = +228 ==> total -33 pips
trade / lotsize => overall pips on closing on a retracement of 20 pips
#1 / 0.1 => -55 * 1 = -55
#2 / 0.2 => -40 * 2 = -80
#3 / 0.3 => -25 * 3 = -75
#4 / 0.5 => -10 * 5 = -50
#5 / 0.8 => +5 * 8 = +40
#6 / 1.2 => +20 * 12 = +240 ==> total +20 pips
=> Using 6 trades drawdown (out of Maxtrades) you need a move of 20 pips to overstep SecureProfit of 10.
trade / lotsize => overall pips on closing on a retracement of 21 pips
#1 / 0.1 => -69 * 1 = -69
#2 / 0.2 => -54 * 2 = -108
#3 / 0.3 => -39 * 3 = -117
#4 / 0.5 => -24 * 5 = -120
#5 / 0.8 => -9 * 8 = -72
#6 / 1.2 => +6 * 12 = +72
#7 / 1.8 => +21 * 18 = +378 ==> total -36 pips
trade / lotsize => overall pips on closing on a retracement of 22 pips
#1 / 0.1 => -68 * 1 = -68
#2 / 0.2 => -53 * 2 = -106
#3 / 0.3 => -38 * 3 = -114
#4 / 0.5 => -23 * 5 = -115
#5 / 0.8 => -8 * 8 = -64
#6 / 1.2 => +7 * 12 = +84
#7 / 1.8 => +22 * 18 = +396 ==> total +13 pips
=> Using 6 trades drawdown (out of Maxtrades) you need a move of 22 pips to overstep SecureProfit of 10.
So if you want to have the effect needing smaller retracements, when the trade goes against you, you must enhance the profitfactor between 1.5 and 2.
mibl
If you switch over to 1.5 progression your first argument on SecureProfit is no longer correct.
So if you want to have the effect needing smaller retracements, when the trade goes against you, you must enhance the profitfactor between 1.5 and 2.
miblMy testing to date has been mainly done on a doubling progression and my first comments reflected that with the attached gif previously posted as an example.
I have not tested the effects of the 1.5 progression but agree that the retracement needed to close profitably will be increased and that would affect my argument comparing this EA with Roulette.
Thank you for your analysis I have not done the work to see exactly how much more retracement will be needed I am prepared to forward test the 1.5 progression and after time decide on it's effectiveness.
I have however been forward testing a 1.64 progression and have included a current screenshot indicating some increased retracement needed and no doubt more will be needed with the 1.5 progression.
Thank you for your interest and contribution to this thread
John