Is martin so bad? Or do you have to know how to cook it? - page 38

 

I thought I would do it differently. you take the maximum drawdown, for a certain period of time, I took for 13 years, for each instrument, find the maximum drawdown of all the instruments. Multiply it by 2 or 3, depending on the drawdown frequency, we obtain the initial deposit. We look at the history to avoid overlapping of drawdowns on different instruments. Now we launch 15 pairs. The yield has increased by 10 times, while the drawdown has remained the same. Since not all pairs need the whole deposit at once, we can say that this is equivalent to the increase in the yield of 1 instrument, and increase in the total number of deals. If we provide 5 instruments with money, this will have little effect. Of course, reliability will increase, but profitability will not. Besides, the lots are self-deception, what are we waiting for when we open a position in the lot?

A good time? If we know how to find good moments, then let's trade only in these moments, otherwise there is no point in losing lots. The only sense is to pause the trading, and the sense is purely psychological. There is no difference between the lock and closing/opening a position somewhere else. If I use a lock, it's only for easier reference to the logic. I see the lock, and remember this place, so to speak, for clarity.

 
zfs:
I've already checked it, so it's better not to spread out in one deposit. I think this will be enough for the most capricious trader, and those who use 15 instruments on martin are doomed.)
Yes they are.... ) With what deposit? With $100 of course they are doomed, but with $20K, unlikely. And the larger the amount, and the more pairs, the lower the risks. Diversification may occur even on 1 instrument if you use different investment horizons. For example, with a channel width of 30 points and 90, the pair will suffer drawdowns at different times. Thus, by doubling the deposit you may add another 15 pairs, but with a different investment horizon, thus reducing risks with the same yield. One pair cannot simultaneously go into drawdown with different corridor width.
 
223231:

I thought I would do it differently. you take the maximum drawdown, for a certain period of time, I took for 13 years, for each instrument, find the maximum drawdown of all the instruments. Multiply it by 2 or 3, depending on the drawdown frequency, we obtain the initial deposit. We look at the history to prevent the drawdowns from overlapping on different instruments. Now we launch 15 pairs. The yield has increased by 10 times, while the drawdown has remained the same. Since not all pairs need the whole deposit at once, we can say that this is equivalent to the increase in the yield of 1 instrument, and increase in the total number of deals. If we provide 5 instruments with money, this will have little effect. Of course, reliability will increase, but profitability will not. Besides, the lots are self-deception, what are we waiting for when we open a position in the lot?

A good time? If we know how to find good moments, then let's trade only in these moments, otherwise there is no point in losing lots. The only sense is to pause the trading, and the sense is purely psychological. There is no difference between the lock and closing/opening a position somewhere else. If I use a lock, it's only for easier reference to the logic. I see the lock, and remember this place, so to speak, for clarity.

If you look at 15 pairs, you will see that 70% of pairs will have drawdown at the same time.

By lock you can overlap, the difference is the spread, by opening a position closing you pay the broker every time.

 
zfs:

If you look at 15 pairs, you will see that 70% of pairs will have drawdowns at the same time.

The lock can be overlapped, the difference is the spread, by opening a position you pay the broker every time you close it.

I guess when we put a position in the lock we don't open a counter position and don't pay the spread for it.....
 
zfs:

If you look at 15 pairs, you will see that 70% of pairs will have drawdowns at the same time.

The lock can be overlapped, the difference is the spread, by opening a position you pay the broker every time you close it.

One assumes, but I have already considered.
 
223231:
One assumes and I have already looked into it.
You have no proof, so we'll assume it's your unsubstantiated speculation) What you see in the tester doesn't mean anything.
 
The thing that amazes me about the MQL forum is that no one wants to discuss anything, it seems that everyone has gathered here to share their experience, but no one listens to anyone. I seldom write, I mostly read to broaden my horizons. Of course not much good is being written, but that's because all the good stuff is hidden behind the flood that covers everything. Instead of discussing, sharing, developing, earning and becoming richer and freer, it usually comes down to mutual humiliation. That's what it comes down to. Why waste your time on this? That's why a lot of normal people don't even post on the forum. And I'm going to stop doing that.
 
223231:
The thing that amazes me about the MQL forum is that no one wants to discuss anything, it seems that everyone has gathered here to share their experience, but no one listens to anyone. I seldom write, I mostly read to broaden my horizons. Of course not much good is being written, but that's because all the good stuff is hidden behind the rubbish that overflows everything. Instead of discussing, sharing, developing, earning and becoming richer and freer, it usually comes down to mutual humiliation. That's what it comes down to. Why waste your time on this? That's why a lot of normal people don't even post on the forum. And I'm going to give it a rest.
You were asked to provide proof of your conjectures for a productive exchange, but if you took it as an insult to yourself, then where should we non-professional traders go).
 
223231:

I thought I would do it differently. you take the maximum drawdown, for a certain period of time, I took for 13 years, for each instrument, find the maximum drawdown of all the instruments. Multiply it by 2 or 3, depending on the drawdown frequency, we obtain the initial deposit. We look at the history to prevent the drawdowns from overlapping on different instruments. Now we launch 15 pairs. The yield has increased by 10 times, while the drawdown has remained the same. Since not all pairs need the whole deposit at once, we can say that this is equivalent to the increase in the yield of 1 instrument, and increase in the total number of deals. If we provide 5 instruments with money, this will have little effect. Of course, reliability will increase, but profitability will not. Besides, the lots are self-deception, what are we waiting for when we open a position in the lot?

A good time? If we know how to find good moments, then let's trade only in these moments, otherwise there is no point in losing lots. The only sense is to pause the trading, and the sense is purely psychological. There is no difference between the lock and closing/opening a position somewhere else. If I use a lock, it's only to facilitate the logic. I see a lock, and remember the location, so to speak, for clarity.

I can't say that I'm a lock supporter, but there were situations when I had to use it and handle it.

If you're a little bit curious why they were banned (MT4 doesn't matter).

You know, all Forex is a bubble that in most cases is based on loks.

I'm not saying it's a good thing.

As for saving spread on overlapping positions, that's true. My strategy is based on a lot with overlap, if you watched the test video carefully. 3 out of 4 trades are profitable.

 
223231:
The thing that amazes me about the MQL forum is that no one wants to discuss anything, it seems that everyone has gathered here to share experience, but no one listens to anyone. I seldom write, I mostly read to broaden my horizons. Of course not much good is being written, but that's because all the good stuff is hidden behind the rubbish that overflows everything. Instead of discussing, sharing, developing, earning and becoming richer and freer, it usually comes down to mutual humiliation. That's what it comes down to. Why waste your time on this? That's why many normal people don't even post on the forum. And I'm going to give it a rest.
I agree with you 100%. I myself read a lot on forums. This thread is a big exception for me, I very rarely comment myself.