Where to start? - page 20
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
There are again inconsistencies - 4 years is no longer a statistic...? And the absence of at least one losing trade in 4 years is what?
Stop playing around, take your guarantees back, and reconsider your attitude to break-even trading!
If your goal is to achieve so-called "break-even trading" by any means, regardless of drawdowns, even the assurances are too bad: the statistics is too few. And your drawdowns by equity are simply monstrous.
The 4 year timeframe does not tell you anything if the trades are few.
2 vdsfx: what 70 trades are you talking about? There are only 16 of them.
Purely theoretically ( I've always been very interested ): what would you like to hear ( figures, facts, trading period ... ) so that you change your attitude to "break-even trading" ?
P.S. I think you would be very surprised if you found out how easy (I would say primitive) these kinds of results are achieved.
If you aim to achieve so-called "break-even trading" by any means, regardless of drawdowns, then even here the guarantees are very bad: there are too few statistics. And your drawdowns by equity are simply monstrous.
The 4 year timeframe does not tell you anything, if the trades are few.
2 vdsfx: what 70 deals are you talking about? There are only 16 of them.
If you set yourself the goal of achieving so-called "break-even trading" by any means....
I have always wanted to see such smart people who would repeat this result, not in 4 years, but at least in 2 years.
All of them are good at flailing their tongues and presenting similar results, but they don't.
Now we are going to whine that "no one needs", but do not have the guts to confirm their words with deeds!
And the facts speak to the contrary: there is a stop loss in each transaction, so there is no question of waiting for losses, and the fact that there are no losses - it's a fact, no matter how hard you try to present it.
P.S.I didn't expect such feeble-mindedness from you, Mathemat ,not much demand from the other one...
There are again inconsistencies - 4 years is no longer a statistic...? And the absence of at least one losing trade in 4 years is what?
Stop playing around, take back your guarantees, and reconsider your attitude to break-even trading!
Yeah, there's that break-even statistic crap right there.
Yes, it's not that many, but it may be overlapping.
The strategy is conservative (not scalping or intraday), designed for large trends, and does not react to all pullbacks. Stop loss allows skipping pullbacks without triggering them, and should only be triggered in case of force majeure - a sharp trend reversal after significant news. In the discussions of the Expert Advisor there is a test report with more than half a year of forward testing.
Taking into account that a stop loss is placed in each deal, the issue of waiting for losses is removed.
Yes, deals are few, but one should not expect a large number of deals from a conservative strategy.
Some Investors (not all) like this type of strategy.
With a stop loss on every trade, the issue of overlapping losses is eliminated.
....