Hedge saved you, who will save Hedge ? - page 18
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
Hi there !
So from the tester to show off
... the first signal to evaluate (recovery zone : 15+40=55)
... the second signal (recovery zone : 100+200=300)
I can say that a too short zone works but it ain't feasible due to live constraints (spread, slippage etc ...), and a much more larger zone do work and operates at a rate of approx. +/-3% per day ; +/-90% per month ; +/- 1080% per year (roughly speaking)
So now the idea is to calibrate poquito a poquito the zone size by keeping the ratio of takeprofit/stoploss until the lower limit observed with 15+40=55 pts ; the goal being obviously to get the best cadence supported by this broker (demo) and so on to improve the profit.
Technically talking there's still errors I noticed higher in the logs ( [Position doesn't exist]) but I think it's due to execution, plus it doesn't seems to disturb when the zone is large enough, offsets are likely drowned and therefore remain trivial (in contrast with a short zone, where every points matters).
154-16-528-122+512+6.50 = 6.50, it's well compensated
EDIT : I find more relevant to keep random entries but avoid unvolatile markets than introducing signals
Interesting results. But do you increase lots indefinitely? It will eventually blow up the account.
Interesting results. But do you increase lots indefinitely? It will eventually blow up the account.
By 1%, it's a risk to take otherwise it's even more rotten as a strategy : that's precisely where's the difficulty.
Look, I go to the market right now, I download one of the most popular hedging system without giving its name, I run a quick test with 100 000 usd and default settings and that's what I get using MetaQuotes server :
So. The goal isn't to do better than the neighbor, but if with $100,000 you only get 25usd after 5 months, no, no no no no no no no no !
I don't think I'll use this strategy one day on my own account, I may eventually sell it because some swear only by hedging but to myself I never go without a stoploss - unless if I can make it scalps like in the video but for sure it won't be possible with retail brokers conditions. Yet MetaQuotes server provides very advantageous conditions.
This is how my EA is currently working. Nevermind all the numbers, symbols and colors that appear on chart, they are there so I can see what my EA is doing.
You can see Balance and Equity on the top right corner of the screen.
You can see that it actually works pretty well on both on ranging and trending market.
The problem is that when it reaches the maximum lot multiplier, sometimes it can't get out of it. I could keep increasing lots, but I don't think it is the best way to handle it.
The problem ususally happens on a very specific situation: The market is ranging, lot multiplier is high (maximum alowed by the EA) and before the EA manages to close the trades, a strong trend beggins. When I solve this problem, I think the EA will be ready.
I'll try to incorporate Ahmad idea: the EA will calculate how much lot is required to counter the trade according to how far the price has moved just in case the signal is activated.
This is how my EA is currently working. Nevermind all the numbers, symbols and colors that appear on chart, they are there so I can see what my EA is doing.
You can see Balance and Equity on the top right corner of the screen.
You can see that it actually works pretty well on both on ranging and trending market.
The problem is that when it reaches the maximum lot multiplier, sometimes it can't get out of it. I could keep increasing lots, but I don't think it is the best way to handle it.
The problem ususally happens on a very specific situation: The market is ranging, lot multiplier is high (maximum alowed by the EA) and before the EA manages to close the trades, a strong trend beggins. When I solve this problem, I think the EA will be ready.
I'll try to incorporate Ahmad idea: the EA will calculate how much lot is required to counter the trade according to how far the price has moved just in case the signal is activated.
Eternal problem with this strategy. Errr... it happens for YASS too, btw it's no impossible that one appear on the signal, it can happen anytime. But you may not be able to counter opened deals with one & only one opposed order : there's a margin constraint.
I tried to limit this phenomenon by uncogging the margin, by releasing lots i talk of with Ahmad above in the thread, it's still experimental but worst without.
By introducing volatility in the algorithm, it's possible to tell the EA if it's worth placing a hedge for current deal or just accept the loss. It's just an idea among many.
This is how my EA is currently working. Nevermind all the numbers, symbols and colors that appear on chart, they are there so I can see what my EA is doing.
You can see Balance and Equity on the top right corner of the screen.
You can see that it actually works pretty well on both on ranging and trending market.
The problem is that when it reaches the maximum lot multiplier, sometimes it can't get out of it. I could keep increasing lots, but I don't think it is the best way to handle it.
The problem ususally happens on a very specific situation: The market is ranging, lot multiplier is high (maximum alowed by the EA) and before the EA manages to close the trades, a strong trend beggins. When I solve this problem, I think the EA will be ready.
I'll try to incorporate Ahmad idea: the EA will calculate how much lot is required to counter the trade according to how far the price has moved just in case the signal is activated.
That one for example, if it goes up again, it won't open a new one :
It's ranging but there it started with a sell because of my random entries so ... my fault even with a basic moving average it would not have happened ;)
That one for example, if it goes up again, it won't open a new one :
It's ranging but there it started with a sell because of my random entries so ... my fault even with a basic moving average it would not have happened ;)
I see... but it could happen anyway in another situation.
It's like you said, the eternal problem with this strategy. There will be a point where you can't increase lot size and there's nothing left to do.
I see... but it could happen anyway in another situation.
It's like you said, the eternal problem with this strategy. There will be a point where you can't increase lot size and there's nothing left to do.
There is a solution to any problem, we just didn't yet find which.
It requires some rest and reflection.
I've try something but it didn't work.
Anyway ...
It's still experimental, it seems that it needs to be activated only conditionnaly (undetermined for now), it reduces those losing bigs deals but also the profit supposed taken. It would be perfecto if it could work everytime, what's not the case
Without : there's much loss but since it takes all profit, it recovers
edit : it's recovering suavecito despacito - ain't byzance but ain't bad for a hedging system
So. The goal isn't to do better than the neighbor, but if with $100,000 you only get 25usd after 5 months, no, no no no no no no no no !
Haha, I know that feeling. 25usd/5month was like 20 cents per days. Maybe become a beggar can do better than that (no offense to beggar out there).
I've tried something but it didn't work.
Anyway ...
It's still experimental, it seems that it needs to be activated only conditionnaly (undetermined for now), it reduces those losing bigs deals but also the profit supposed taken. It would be perfecto if it could work everytime, what's not the case
about this, well, we all seem to have the same problem here, don't we? Me too still got in trouble with this guy.
If we see it in a math, let's say the chance for this to happen is in percent. It doesn't matter how many percents your strategy has, it still will occur (that's a sad and painful truth).
The question is when?
Let's assume your strategy has 1% chances of blowing the account. Maybe that 1% happens after a few trades; maybe it happens after 5 years of trading. We never know, but the chance is still there. Same goes for strategy with more than 20% chances. It might happen now, it might happen later but the thing is, it will happen. The good news is, we can decide how much to lose when it happens.
Here's another story about this;
In my observation so far, it depends on your very first entry. It varies depending on the first entry when we start the EA.
This seems to occur on both tester and live account (I've been monitoring this for almost 2 years now).
When you start your EA on the tester, you have a specific starting point right? So, each time you're testing and improvising the method, it's simply just for that specific starting point.
When you go live, you will have a different starting point compared to your "already improvise starting point in the tester". There you go, the reason for why your EA doing great in tester but not so good in live trading.
That is why many available products in the market are either lucky enough to survive this painful truth (but it's gonna punish them later) or they go safe routes which are 20 cents per day (lol).
So, when you're saying you want to make this hedging system universal template for any entry strategy, I think you must consider this as one of the factors. Like mine, I've my own way to solve it. Might share it later.
I hope, you understand my "essay" up there (lol) and as usual, hopefully, you might catch something useful from there.
This is how my EA is currently working. Nevermind all the numbers, symbols and colors that appear on the chart, they are there so I can see what my EA is doing.
You can see Balance and Equity in the top right corner of the screen.
You can see that it actually works pretty well on both on ranging and trending market.
Man... your chart is beautiful. How did you do that?
I see you've implemented the idea you describe before (Good work!)
and I bet you also have met a similar problem as I faced before using this kind of technique (we both know what is it). If this technique combined with an auto lot as I suggested before, it will create another problem (ah! one after another). I've tried it before. They simply never give up in their attempt to annoy us, didn't they?
The problem is that when it reaches the maximum lot multiplier, sometimes it can't get out of it. I could keep increasing lots, but I don't think it is the best way to handle it.
The problem usually happens on a very specific situation: The market is ranging, lot multiplier is high (maximum allowed by the EA) and before the EA manages to close the trades, a strong trend begins.
Yup, this is why I'm suggesting you to wait for a signal before opening a new trade either for hedging or martingale. I don't know how you imagine this but it's how I did it. The loop usually already close on its first loop and only sometimes its goes for the double loop (which is bad in my opinion).
but for some reason, I haven't seen it thoroughly yet (too lazy), it still spikes down like the picture Icham post earlier (lol) -
but because of it just 10% of the total balance, so I don't really care, It's ok. The EA will scalp back faster than that.