Trading strategies without StopLoss - page 3
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
Judging by the screenshot, I assume the algorithm is as follows: we open a position, there is a profit, we quickly cover it and open another one. Thus, the balance increases, while equity is in its death throes when the price returns to the oversubscribed position, then all is well. But what if it does not? All profit made from the previous 1000 small profits will be wiped out together with the entire account. Besides, not every broker will let you withdraw the money from an open position, and you will have to wait a year until everything will close in profit before you withdraw something from the account.
There will be no loss.
No stops.
trading locking positions?
It's probably on cent accounts, so that the broker doesn't lose a promising client who, after such a freebie, will make a decent sum of money in the future
It has already been written here, let me repeat. We now have an EA working which is fucking up without an SL, but with an SL it is fucking down. I completely agree that the SL is a route to nowhere, I can explain it mathematically if anyone disagrees.
Let's say we have 100 roubles. We open a trade and put a stop. The stop triggered, we have 50 roubles left. What do we have here? We have the following. A loss of 50%, but the funny thing is that in order to simply return it to 0, we need to add another 50 rubles to the remaining 50, which is a return of 100%, how many can boast of such returns?
On the other hand, if money management is used wisely, we can easily outbid moves of 1 000 points on four digits. Besides, no one forbids to continue trading in the account while there is something suspended, and eventually repay this dangling loss. So I personally am strongly against SL.
It has already been written here, let me repeat. We now have an EA working which is fucking up without an SL, but with an SL it is fucking down. I completely agree that the SL is a route to nowhere, I can explain it mathematically if anyone disagrees.
Let's say we have 100 roubles. We open a trade and put a stop. The stop triggered, we have 50 roubles left. What do we have here? We have the following. A loss of 50%, but the funny thing is that in order to simply return it to 0, we need to add another 50 rubles to the remaining 50, which is a return of 100%, how many can boast of such returns?
On the other hand, if money management is used wisely, we can easily outbid moves of 1 000 points on four digits. Besides, no one forbids to continue trading in the account while there is something suspended, and eventually repay this dangling loss. So I personally am strongly against SL.
You bought the Euro at 1.4 and how many years have you been waiting for a return, wouldn't it have been better to close with a 50pp loss ?
+1
Close on the stop and then enter, but already lower. There is no need to over sit)).
It has already been written here, let me repeat. We now have an EA working which is fucking up without an SL, but with an SL it is fucking down. I totally agree that SL is a route to nowhere, I can explain it mathematically if anyone disagrees.
Now there is going to be another argument over nothing, because everyone is talking about different things.
1. From a mathematical point of view. lock is not profitable. I've calculated it on a calculator.)
2. From the point of view of real trading, the lock is profitable, especially if the strategy itself does not provide SL.
3 If the price moved away from the lock, you should not wait for the price to return. After all, it is a lock.
Doing deliberately, constantly locks - the way to nowhere. There are many more points, but I forgot about them.)