Grail. The puzzle is an interesting theme. - page 2

New comment
 
I think you optimised the parameters on recent history, so I ran it in the tester from April to October 2007. Initial data as you wrote in the first post (if I got it right): LevelDistance=21, StopLoss=34, MoneyTakeProfit=2000. Tested only buy because with sell it says there is not enough money. Result:

Believe me, I'm not the biggest pessimist on this forum.

 

It appears that we gain the number of lots without any reason, without relying on what's happening in the market - it's absurd!

If I try to do something with Fibonacci, I would try to build a grid of orders according to this series, but not to "pyramid" in such a sequence.


In general, this topic is interesting as I try to learn to handle pending orders properly.

Good luck.

 
VBAG:

It turns out that we are increasing the number of lots for no reason, without reference to what is happening in the market - it's absurd!

If we are trying to use Fibonacci in some way, I would try to build a grid of orders according to this series but not pyramid in such a sequence.


In general, this topic is interesting as I try to learn to handle pending orders properly.

Good luck.

once again!!! It is in this form just a good money management system. To automatically go in the + on the tester and you need indicator management! That's what it's all about! You need automatic entry/exit points. In other words, either insert the induks (create a system) or insert this into a profitable Expert Advisor!!! At this stage - opening trades in manual trading not by pressing orders, but by enabling this expert.
 
seifer:
I think you optimised the parameters on recent history, so I ran it in the tester from April to October 2007. Initial data as you wrote in the first post (if I got it right): LevelDistance=21, StopLoss=34, MoneyTakeProfit=2000. Tested only buy because with sell it says there is not enough money. Result:

Believe me, I'm not the biggest pessimist on this forum.

 
Fibo писал (а):
once again!!! It is in this form just a good money management system.
You're kidding, and many people will really think it's an MM.
 
Fibo:
seifer:
I think you optimized the parameters on recent history, so I ran in the tester from April to October 2007. Initial data is as you wrote in first post (if I got it right): LevelDistance=21, StopLoss=34, MoneyTakeProfit=2000. Tested only buy because with sell it says there is not enough money. Result:

Believe me, I'm not the biggest pessimist on this forum.

wrong. discuss step 40 stop 24 lot 0.02 money here closing 5000 quid. And you can also analyse ready-made Expert Advisors, and this is still raw - just a system instead of manual trading to maximise profits / minimise losses. That's what I want to make a full-fledged EXPERT out of it.
 
VBAG:
Fibo wrote (a):
once again!!! It is in this form just a good money management system.
You're kidding, and many people will really think it's MM.
No i'm not. at least the risk is reduced as the position builds up. Show me where else have you seen such a system?
 
Fibo:
VBAG:
Fibo wrote (a):
I say it again!!! It's just a good money management system in this form.
You're kidding, and many will indeed think it's MM.
No, I'm not joking. at least as the position builds up, the risk is reduced. Show me where else have you seen something like this?

Well that goes straight to Mr Reshetov!

If i'm serious, there is a lot of information on MM, including on this forum.

I just gave my IMHO opinion. I did not want to argue with anyone. Good luck.

 
VBAG:
Fibo:
VBAG:
Fibo wrote (a):
once again I say!!! It's just a good money management system in this form.
You're kidding, and many will indeed think it's MM.
no i'm not joking. at least as the position builds up the risk is reduced. Show me where else have you seen something like that?

Well, that goes straight to Mr Reshetov!

But seriously, there is a lot on MM, including on this forum.

I was simply expressing my IMHO. I did not want to argue with anyone. Good luck.

No aces in sight yet, although I would like to know what they think. maybe they'll join us later?
 
OK. Maybe I was too hasty with the tests, but if you only want to use this Expert Advisor as a lot size management system, then you should have written it that way from the start. So the least you need to do is to find a profitable TS ;) I was thinking that firstly the Expert Advisor should be written and then MM should be attached to it (depending on peculiarities of its work). If the robot is profitable it will bring profit with a fixed lot, if the TS is rubbish, no MM will help.
123456789...13
New comment