Interesting topic for many: what's new in MetaTrader 4 and MQL4 - big changes on the way - page 28
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
Sorry for the naive question...
The need for ask(OHLC) as opposed to bid(OHLC)+spread is due to the fact that in the first case it is 4d data and in the second 1d ? So there is more information, or am I missing something?
Thank you.
If you look at it that way, yes. Ask candle is 4 figures and bid candle is 4, inside the candle spread can theoretically change, i.e. it can be askO-bidO!=askH-bidH!=askL-bidL!=askC-bidC! So this is additional information that has value.
Nothing from the wishes, concerning systematic trading. Out of 100,000 in the community, 99,800 lose money. 100 make money on the Market. 100 make money trading. 50 out of them - algotrading.
These 50, because of their passivity, are *** to C.
Better the bitter truth.
Excuse me, but don't you think calls for MQs to expand the price data set are the voice of the crying in the wilderness?
Personally, I concluded long ago that MT5 quotes, for all their advantages in speed and convenience of obtaining, are no better in quality than those of MT4, and sometimes even inferior to them.
And the current changes, sooner or later, will lead to the fact that all old MT4 quotes will be transferred to the closed MT5 format.
Hence the question, whether this will not lead to a deterioration of the currently available MT4 quote quality, in the absence of the user's ability to adjust them, that is, maybe now we should not think about "asks", but "bids", although at first glance, the fear looks absurd...
The paradox is that the amount of information needed is even less than is currently being spent. And so the main problem is this:
Took me a day to check your lures, frankly I won't check any of your words further without serious justification.
I checked your theory about HighBid & LowAsk (indicators attached, Ind Tick - sliced bars by MQ, Ind Tick hrenfx - sliced bars by HighBid & LowAsk)
There is a difference, on average LowAsk is higher than LowBid by a spread, HighBid at MQ and HighBid & LowAsk are almost the same. Ah yes, the MQ-model is based on Close & Close+Spread, HighBid & LowAsk is based on Bid & Ask.
The picture is taken from Alpari quotes.
Now for the essence of your suggestions: if already introduce a new bar model with additional information,
If we want to check the correctness of this price, then do not, as you say, HighBid & LowAsk, but normally HighAsk & LowAsk + HighBid & LowBid. Then the informativeness will increase, otherwise it won't be worthwhile.
Otherwise just add the spread to the Low bar and the data is almost indistinguishable from the HighBid & LowAsk model.
Now on the essence of your suggestions: if already introduce a new bar model with additional information,
If you are not saying HighBid & LowAsk, then HighAsk & LowAsk + HighBid & LowBid is normal. Then the informativeness will increase, otherwise it's all not worth a damn.
Otherwise just add the spread to the Low bar and the data is almost indistinguishable from the HighBid & LowAsk model.
This is where "almost" is all the darkness, strange as it may sound. You can't just act statistically. If 99% will coincide and 1% will not coincide, but at the same time 1% are local extrema (peaks of the ZigZag). That's it, the accuracy of the tester results is over. And this is how it turns out in practice that the most important 1% carries these most serious distortions.
I do not even know how to explain the obvious things to the practitioner, who is far from it.
What is the spread of a bar in the MT5 history? I will write a light MQL4 script that will show the divergence. Then I will be able to draw a picture based on the results. However I doubt that there will be as many questions.
The most difficult thing is to explain the obvious things.
It's not about the quality of quotes or even about providing an ascetic history. It's about the fact that the current metatetesters are not suitable for normal algotrading. And what the simplest things you can do to make at least an MT4 tester usable.
Buy yourself a new tester - you have plenty of money).
Everyone needs an accurate tester in MT (they don't understand it yet), except me and a few other algotraders with their research infrastructure. So I'm not trying for myself - an ideological message. I didn't need a lecture either.
Everyone needs an accurate tester in MT (they don't understand it yet), except me and a few other algotraders with their research infrastructure. So I'm not trying for myself - an ideological message. I didn't need a lecture either.