The future of automated trading - page 3
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
So you're ready to wrestle in chess against Deep Blue and even hope to win? Kasparov failed to do so.
Besides, behind the supercomputers of the big companies are the best mathematicians and economists. And what can pioneers with metatraderies do against them?
For information: inhouse development of "big companies" is of such a disgusting quality that MetaTrader looks like the top of perfection after them.
In this case you should not start by comparing MT with its competitors, but by comparing generations of MT itself.
And preferably start not with MQL, but with the platform becoming closer to traders (how complex and effective Expert Advisors can be created from the manual trading point of view).
I don't want to blame the developers for anything, but there are a lot of professionals in their team. But it seems to me that over time, these professionals are "going to extremes" more and more - namely, they start to do their "favorite thing" and develop a platform for PROGRAMMERS.
Everything that is being done now in terms of MQL-development and autotrading in MT makes me glad as a programmer (of course, I could say that it is impressive, but I can't yet).
From the viewpoint of programmer I would give 4+ for the work done (keeping in mind that there is no limit to perfection).
But unfortunately I'm not just a programmer, from the trader's point of view (or a programmer who creates MTS), how should I put it gently - I for some reason I feel more and more that under the guise of a new trading system something really weird is coming out. But for some reason I have the feeling my results in R2 (where I traded hands) would be absolutely fabulous compared to what I see on MT5, as long as I use the same strategy with equal risk.
PS
Almost five years ago I switched from R2 (Forex Club) to MT4, probably many people did the same (and still do). I made my choice also based on the possibility to trade automatically.
But the more I got to know about MT5 the more I personally would like to stay with MT4. My choice will be 100 times better.
I certainly expected that the implementation of the OOP in the new platform will be special, I guessed that there will be problems with migration, I was 100% sure that NETTING is the developers' choice (for which they will fight until the last drop of blood).
But believe me, I certainly didn't expect that the rights to a peaceful and comfortable old age for the average TRADER would be so infringed.
PPS
OK, the hell with them with LOCKS - NETTING rules, but it doesn't rule in ANY WAY. No, maybe "right", but tell me - Why couldn't the whole process have been made more HUMAN?
To begin with, I would like two answers to this question of mine (after the word "HOWEVER"). The first answer is preferably technical (clearly answering the question of how things work and why they are so), and the second from a trader's point of view.The client terminal is just the tip of the iceberg of the whole MetaTrader 5 complex.
We have made a lot of things very convenient for traders, but we also raised the server platform itself to a new level by implementing a lot of functionality that brokers need. The emphasis on auto-trading is to support a significant trend in trading. In fact, with MetaTrader we've made it possible to use EAs en masse and easily, and our competitors only have to scratch their heads and try to offer their dangerous Java/C#/.NET development environments.
With the stock system, the issue is practically closed - it will be squeezed out of the market by regulators. In that sense, MetaTrader 5 came along just in time.
Please show us some examples of inconvenient/wrongly implemented netting processes - we'll look into it.
For information: inhouse developments of "big companies" are of such a disgusting quality that MetaTrader will look like the top of perfection after them.
What kind of developments? If the terminals are for retail customisers, then I absolutely agree. And the more decent and reliable the bank/broker, the uglier the terminal.
But if we are talking about specialized trading software, it should not be pretty or even convenient, it should just trade according to its rules. Quickly analyse tons of dates and trade quickly. And they can do it. And here MT will never be a competitor to them, even just in terms of hardware. And by software too.
What kind of developments? If the terminals are for retail customisers, then I absolutely agree. And the more decent and reliable the bank/broker, the uglier the terminal.
But if we are talking about specialized trading software, it should not be beautiful or even convenient, it should just trade according to its rules. Quickly analyse tons of dates and trade quickly. And they can do it. And here MT will never be a competitor to them, even just in terms of hardware. And in terms of software too.
When the custom software is ugly, the server/internal software is even uglier and horrible by an order of magnitude. Personally, I've seen it - I felt sorry for the people who had to use it.
Don't think they have such fabulous systems underneath. Trading software cannot exist without an analytical/chart system with visualisation. That means you need a terminal, not business logic on a pure api.
The client terminal is just the tip of the iceberg of the whole MetaTrader 5 complex.
We did a lot of comfortable for traders, but also we upgraded the server platform itself, implementing many of the features that brokers need. The emphasis on auto-trading is to support a significant trend in trading. In fact, with MetaTrader we've made it possible to use EAs en masse and easily, and our competitors only have to scratch their heads and try to offer their dangerous Java/C#/.NET development environments.
With the stock system, the issue is practically closed - it will be squeezed out of the market by regulators. In that sense, MetaTrader 5 came along just in time.
Please show us some examples of inconvenient/wrongly implemented netting processes - we'll look into it.
1. I understand that this is the top of ISBERG. But this top is enough to sink more than one TITANIC (client deposit).
2. Probably not for TRADERS, but for PROGRAMMERS and people who use MTS. Trust me, they are different things. I always admired the capabilities of MQL, and continue to appreciate the professionalism of YOUR team as programmers. But who will think about the fate of DEPOSIT of ordinary DEAD TRADERS, who can only dream about working with big brokers (like MICEX and NYSE).
The point of improvement for the trader, in my opinion, should not be in how advanced the language of the trading platform is, but in what can be created with this language.
3. The question is: what do you think about the possibility of using rubrics in your trading platform?
And as to whether or not it was in time is debatable. All kicked R2 five years ago traded on NETTING, and now they shout on every corner that they are the BEST and their decision was BRIGHT IN THE FRAMEWORK?
But as far as I know, many brokerage companies and my experience with the MT4 terminal show that locking is OPTIONAL. But I have not seen the official confirmation of the developers of this topic.
PS
But try to use not a STANDARD STRATEGY (put a position and wait either TP or SL), but more advanced variants - trim, fraction, flips and so on.
You have to look at the whole process not as programmers, but as traders who have never worked with programming, and attention - as traders on a PLATFORM without any automation.
PPS
In my opinion, the situation is like this - buy MT5 and get MT4 as a present (or vice versa)...
How sad it is :(
The client terminal is just the tip of the iceberg of the whole MetaTrader 5 complex.
We have made it very convenient for traders, but we also raised the server platform itself to a new level by implementing a lot of functionality that brokers need. The emphasis on auto-trading is to support a meaningful trend in trading. In fact, with MetaTrader we've made it possible to use EAs en masse and easily, and our competitors only have to scratch their heads and try to offer their dangerous Java/C#/.NET development environments.
With the stock system, the issue is practically closed - it will be squeezed out of the market by regulators. In that sense, MetaTrader 5 came along just in time.
Please show us some examples of inconveniently/incorrectly implemented netting processes - we'll look into it.
But the funny thing is that I've recently learned that you can add new symbols, including stock symbols, but you have hidden them so carefully that they are not just difficult to find on the first try, but even on the 10th))
You should bring them closer.
As for beauty, I wouldn't mind even a 16-coloured terminal :D
It's not a plush toy and it's better to develop functionality than to make a calculator with half a gig of skins)
Why are you pounding the platform? After all, it is clear that no platform (no matter how great it is) will not save your trade from requotes on 0.01 lots, connection failures at the most inopportune (for the trader, of course) moments. All these gimmicks of brokerage companies will not be fixed by any platform. They (CAs) have a bunch of methods to withdraw money from citizens in a relatively honest way. The main evil is in the DC, and the platform will be corrected, give time. In my opinion MT5 is a breakthrough.
Yes, and in my opinion it is a breakthrough. But if I am offered to deposit money (say $ 1000) in a brokerage company, a fairly reliable and well-known (say Alpari) and give me two terminals - MT4 and MT5 (all other things being equal) - What do you think, which one I will choose?
The answer is simple - in the best case I will use MT4 for real trading and leave mechanical analysis (and maybe trade management) to MT5. But God forbid me to open a real account and use my usual TS.
PS
I myself can tell tales about FATTINGS, I've seen enough for five years...
Don't think they have such fabulous systems in depth. Trading software in general cannot exist without an analytical/chart system with visualisation. That means you need a terminal, not business logic on a pure api.
Trading software should be without charts and analytics. It is not a terminal, it is a black box. It should trade. It is necessary to draw charts and build systems on the side, in programs that have been adapted for this purpose.