Is martin so bad? Or do you have to know how to cook it? - page 33
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
Yes, it is small, on 1 pair, if you deversify on 15 pairs, and double the deposit, the yield rises to 100% p.a., and that's not a small profit. I have actually tested everything and spent many hours on tests. It gives a result, the drawdowns do not overlap with each other. So if you use your head, not only to prop up your left hand with it, you can get a profitable tool from martin.
Of course for many people there is nothing to do with 100% per annum, but these people tend to lose, and I write this for those who really understand the value of each percentage.
I have written a martin, with a simple definition of the current market situation. The entry is random, i.e. the distribution is roughly 50/50. Look what I've got: the test from 2000 up to now may be done with any pair. I tested it with all pairs with history from 2000, and with pairs without history - from 2008. I checked 40 pairs in total, including gold and exotic ones.
Are you saying that proper money management is able to make profit by using random market entries and exits, and by using volumes that do not depend on the market situation, but only on the results of previous trades?
Let me rephrase: Is it possible to have a random volume of trades in a certain range, with MO~0, then just by scaling this lot, based on previous trades, redistribute the volume to shift the MO in one direction or the other?
There is no structure in the deal flow, e.g. noise with a normal distribution.
Let's remove the costs for simplicity.
Do you think that if you used a different MM, e.g. % of free funds, it would give a worse result over the whole range of the multiplier of that %? Is Martin the most successful choice for your prediction logic?
How risky do you think the places circled in red are?
Are you saying that good money management can pull in a winning MO of a strategy on random entries and exits, and on a volume that does not depend on the state of the market, but only on the result of past trades?
Let me rephrase: Is it possible to have a random volume of trades in a certain range, with MO~0, then just by scaling this lot, based on previous trades, redistribute the volume to shift the MO in one direction or the other?
There is no structure in the deal flow, e.g. noise with a normal distribution.
Let's remove the costs for simplicity.
Do you think that if you used a different MM, e.g. % of free funds, it would give a worse result over the whole range of the multiplier of that %? Is Martin the most successful choice for your prediction logic?
What do you think, how risky are the places circled in red?
It's not money management, money management is a slightly different concept, not relevant to this system. In this case the martingale is part of the system based not on guessing the entry direction, but on the assumption of future market behaviour. The chart in the figure shows the result with a random entry, what else can be said here, exactly 50%, it is even written in the state.
How risky are these places? Maximum drawdown is $3257, which equals 65% of the deposit, the total profit is $8300, which equals 167%.
Even if you lose 100% of your deposit once, you will still have 67% profit. Do not forget that this is a test of 13 years. In this time the markets have changed dramatically, and martin works. And it will work because the market has a non-normal distribution.
This is not a dumb martin, this is a system based on it. If you can predict the future price movement direction, you are a genius, it's easier for me to predict the possible scenario, all my systems are based on probabilities one way or another, including this one.
I'm not going to argue or prove anything, I just want to show people that martin may be stable, that it is possible to build a profitable system in this direction.
By the way, it's not optimized. In fact there are no parameters that are optimised here, it works on 40 pairs with the same parameters.
Asideways market - also known in English as a flat. Unlike a trend, a sideways movement is characterized by a market without a clear direction. Quotes move sideways as if flat. However a really flat sideways movement is rare. The so called saw-toothed sidewall is more common. See "sawing".
Millions of accounts of poor traders are piled in the grave, looking for a sideways trend. Market makers have learned to deceive the public and what to many people seems to be the beginning of a trend may actually be a market shift to a new sideways movement at slightly different levels.
Yes, it is small, on 1 pair, if you deversify on 15 pairs, and double the deposit, the yield rises to 100% p.a., and that's not a small profit. I have actually tested everything and spent many hours on tests. It gives a result, the drawdowns do not overlap with each other. So if you use your head, not only to prop up your left hand with it, you can get a profitable tool from martin.
Of course for many people there is nothing to do with 100% per annum, but these people tend to lose, and I write this for those who really understand the value of each percentage.
You don't diversify at 15 pairs)
I probably don't just say that, but I know and understand what I am talking about.
Here's an example from life: if it's no secret what do you do for a living?
I probably don't just say that, but I know and understand what I am talking about.
Here is an example from life: If it is not a secret what do you do for a living?
This is not money management, money management is a slightly different concept, not related to this system. In this case the martingale is part of a system based not on guessing the direction of entry, but on the assumption of future market behaviour. The chart in the figure shows the result with a random entry, what else can be said here, exactly 50%, it is even written in the state.
How risky are these places? Maximum drawdown is $3257, which equals 65% of the deposit, the total profit is $8300, which equals 167%.
Even if you lose 100% of your deposit once, you will still have 67% profit. Do not forget that this is a test of 13 years. In this time the markets have changed dramatically, and martin works. And it will work because the market has a non-normal distribution.
This is not a dumb martin, this is a system based on it. If you can predict the future price movement direction, you are a genius, it's easier for me to predict the possible scenario, all my systems are based on probabilities one way or another, including this one.
I'm not going to argue or prove anything, I just want to show people that martin may be stable, that it is possible to build a profitable system in this direction.
By the way, it's not optimized. In fact there are no parameters that are optimized here, it works on 40 pairs with the same parameters.
It seems that we deal only with probabilities here:))) Is "market behavior" and the probability of movement in one direction such a different entity?
"Market behaviour" is a structure, i.e. a set of individual movements, up and down, with certain characteristics, MO dynamics, dispersion, etc. But always a trade order is based on a specific prediction of price movement in one of two directions. Trading on a sideways channel is based on the assumption of zero IR and constant or at least continuous variance, the limit bounces on the channel boundaries are not placed out of the blue, but because there is a prediction that the price will turn and go in the direction of the limit.
I don't see any particular difference in predicting the dynamics of the MO and volatility or specific price direction on any of the timeframes. What MO is on one timeframe is price on another, what volatility is on one H-L candle on another, so roughly speaking there is no difference. So one still needs a little genius and correct forecasting. There is no way to do it without it, MM is a post effect and not a source, one cannot make a random prediction with MM, just like one cannot reconstruct details in a low resolution image.
And martingale is a completely absurd MM. It is like a trader trying to fight the market and get back by pushing the risks to the maximum. Is it about maintaining the Equity trend? And the explosive fluctuations in risk? I can still understand those who limit the number of doublings to 3-5, but then it does not really affect the curve. But up to the mainspring, it's completely absurd.
ZS I'm not talking about average risk, talking about "risky places". The problem with classic martin is that once you get to more than half of the distance between the start of the drawdown and the margin call, the risk becomes 100%, which only Jesus or Pythia would do.
Why did I ask about the profession? Because I have been earning my living as a trader for three years now. So I am a trader by profession. And it is interesting for me to argue with professional traders. It's like an engineer arguing with a surgeon about how to transplant a heart). By the way, I used to be an engineer, too.