Question on working with stops: classic on limiters + stops integrated into position
MT5 has received the appropriate licenses to work on the Russian and some foreign exchanges, so the mechanism of stop-levels averaging is approved and regulated. Indeed, in MT5, the concept of stop-loss and take-profit applies to an aggregate position and therefore the averaging of levels in this case is correct. If you want to use separate stop and take profit levels individually for each order, replace them with pending buy stop and sell stop orders of the opposite volume.
1. Licences and accreditations (if any) I would certainly look at :) By the way, where can you look?
2. We are not talking about any "averaging". - Read -"Stop Loss and Take Profit will be overwritten from the new order".
3. But even if it were, it would be a violation of standard exchange trading practice and would violate the Broker-Dealer regulation in part:
While carrying out professional activities in the securities market, brokers and dealers shall:
conscientiously and honestly execute clients' instructions and obligations under agreements on the purchase and sale of securities, acting solely in the interests of clients;
executeclients' orders in full accordance with the instructions received from them, and provide their clients with the best possible conditions for the execution of their orders (in the best possible manner in accordance with the client's instructions).
And the client has not given such an order/instruction!
4. Well, how to circumvent this NONSENCE is a separate topic.... Of course you can :)
The typo has been corrected, thank you.
You set the SL/TP levels yourself, nobody does it for you. Read the definition of these orders, everything is executed accordingly.
If you want to leave these levels at the position unchanged, specify in the new order the same SL and TP as before.
1. Licences and accreditations (if any) I would certainly look at :) By the way, where can you look?
2. We are not talking about any "averaging". - Read -"Stop Loss and Take Profit will be overwritten from the new order".
3. But even if it were, it would be a violation of standard exchange trading practice and would violate the Broker-Dealer regulation in part:
While carrying out professional activities in the securities market, brokers and dealers shall:
conscientiously and honestly execute clients' instructions and obligations under agreements on the purchase and sale of securities, acting solely in the interests of clients;
executeclients' orders in full accordance with the instructions received from them, and provide their clients with the best possible conditions for the execution of their orders (in the best possible manner in accordance with the client's instructions).
And the client has not given such an order/instruction!
4. Well, how to circumvent this NONSENCE is a separate topic.... of course you can :)
I think it was clearly explained to you that there are two options in MT5
1. determine the total TP / SL level for the entire position
2. To set the required number of pending orders.
At the same time, the decision of how to deal with TP/SL is up to the trader. So, this is not a violation of the "common practice".
PS
The logic of the developers regarding the implementation of NETTING is clear - if a person/advisor makes a decision to change a position, he/she bears full responsibility for the consequences of this change. At the same time the broker cannot independently (and this is important) change the amounts and information in orders, or change a position unless there is a good enough reason to do so.
I really don't understand everything that is written... So to speak the problem.
All orders are executed in full accordance with the client's wishes.
When opening an order you can set your SL and TP.
When topping up everything is available, both to set new values and to leave the previous ones.
What is the arbitrariness of a broker?
If you donot know how to do this, then don't worry, we won't get it.
Maybe if a thousand didn't understand, then the problem is not a thousand, but one...
I really don't understand everything that is written...So to speak the problem.
For you personally.
The problem is that when you open trades with different s/l and t/p... certain volumes.
Then the system itself will close your entire consolidated position on the data (stop loss or take profit) from the last order you placed.
It seems to have been clearly explained to you that there are two options in MT5
1) Define a TP/SL for the entire position
2. Set the required number of pending orders.
The decision how to deal with TP/SL is up to the trader. So, this is not a violation of the "common practice".
PS
The logic of the developers regarding the implementation of NETTING is clear - if a person/advisor makes a decision to change a position, he/she bears full responsibility for the consequences of this change. In this case the broker cannot independently (and this is important) change amounts and information in orders, and also change a position unless there is a good reason to do so.
What do clauses 1 and 2 have to do with this? 1 and 2?
The capabilities of the system are fine, but they do not cancel out a bug in the system. I'm talking about cherries among the cherries. And you, take them from the other corner of the tray. :)
The logic of netting is also clear. But exactly the point is that it's not "the person/advisor who makes the decision to change the position", it's the SYSTEM!!! BY HIMSELF!!!
Once again - I did not give such an order!
The typo has been corrected, thanks.
You set the SL/TP levels yourself, nobody does it for you. Read the definition of these orders, everything is executed accordingly.
If you want to leave these levels at the position unchanged, specify in the new order the same SL and TP, as they were before.
I put SL/TP on the appropriate volume, not on the whole position, and the system, - closes the whole!
The net position is for accounting purposes. But why should the system make a decision for me and manage my position if I give specific orders to buy a specific volume at a specific level!
I put SL/TP on the appropriate volume, not on the whole position, and the system, - closes the whole position!
Net position is for accounting. But why should the system make a decision for me and manage my position, if I give specific orders to buy or sell a specific volume at a specific level?
I repeat, SL/TP work as described (for the entire position). By placing them, you are giving exactly that order to the broker. Nobody decides anything for you.
No one is tricking you, you do not have to use them if you are not happy with such behavior.
For you personally.
The problem is that when you open trades with different s/l and t/p... certain volumes.
Then the system itself will close your entire consolidated position using the data (stop loss or take profit) of the last order you placed.
Where is the arbitrage in that?
The volumes are totaled, and the SL and TP levels are set by the user, according to his calculations and discretion.
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
Gentlemen,
Explain to me how a program that pretends to conduct stock market operations can have this kind of execution of client orders/orders?
Client Terminal / Trading / Trading Activity /Changing Positions:
"If there is an open position on a financial instrument and a new order is placed on it, the Stop Loss and Take Profit levels will be overwritten from the new order".
(Open position - spelling of the original :))
The client's order to the broker contains attributes (which are an integral part of the order):
- instrument
- amount
- conditions
Volume, is an integral part of the order.
Since the client did not give an order to close the corresponding VOLUME at this level (and it was generated by the system itself, read broker), then the closing of the entire position of the client to s / l or t / n at a price from the new (last) order is a direct violation of the regulations on the broker-dealer activity, contrary to international practice and may be interpreted as an action broker in his own interests, at the expense of client funds, which will promptly lead to withdrawal regulator license.
It is unbelievable, of course, that such a point has passed the attention of thousands of users, developers and even more so brokers.
I would like some clarification on this point.