NFA bans locking from 15 May 2009 - page 9
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
I prefer swing.
but I do use locks from time to time.
Basically, a lock is an exit from a position.
--
you sold the eu at 1.6 with a 1.0 lot.
and went in with a 1.0 buy at 1.2, the top sell didn't close
you are out of the market!
i.e. a lock of an equal lot is simply an exit from the market with a fixed profit!
now i can close both positions at any time
--
both positions go to Breakeven and now you just have to pick a point to close
and the profit will be the same.
--
because your account just took some profits and now
and the profit will be the same, plus a little bit of swap.
--
I see lock as a purely technical technique... to give you a psychological break.
when working without a lock i'm forced to just close and just open
--
I don't know 100% where the dollar will go tomorrow... I can only try to technically and fundamentally
guess
--
i can only try to guess technically and fundamentally ... but having blocked the profit i may go to bed with a stop loss on both positions
and get up tomorrow and have one of the positions taken down in a small profit, and the other just get a bigger profit
--
so i wouldn't say lock is evil
--
it's just that if the locks are banned, it's probably to someone's advantage.
but i don't think it cares about the clients, just like allowing loks
---
and this is a small example of the work with the lots, in the picture you can see no close the sell on the pound and buy on the canadian
but within a day there is still going up and down
LOCK IS EVIL OR A TECHNICALITY.
so picking a big move with one position is great
but why wouldn't it work on a correction...
I do not see it as a negative
Your counter suggestion of "measuring up" is not entirely clear. I don't think I even hinted at it. Explain, please... Which way to look at it?
It was your suggestion to measure up, not mine. I'm more interested in facts - i.e. an example of the advantage of locking vs. closing a position. This applies to all lockers - rub the snooty Timbo's nose in it, give me an example of a trading strategy that illustrates the advantage of locking.
This thread was only about using a loc to disguise pipsing when there is a time limit on holding a position. Accepted, but it's not a trading strategy, it's a strategy to cheat DCs.
I have a real example of the benefits of using a lock: if a trader has a profitable buy position open and expects price to go down, he may find it more profitable to open a lock. Closing a profit position will require paying income tax in the current tax year and the trader may want to postpone this until the next tax year. The lock will help him in this, as it will lock out the loss of profit but will not create taxable income in the current year. But again, this is not a trading strategy, but a tax optimisation strategy.
As for positive examples of trading with lots, here's an example.
For example, I have two EAs trading on Dax in mt4 at the same time. One of them works within a calculated trading channel on a bounce inwards from its borders. The other one is trading using the tactics of breaking the border of the similar channel and the subsequent breakdown.
Buy positions of one Expert Advisor and sell positions of another one sometimes intersect, i.e. are locked.
But at the same time current total relative deposit drawdown is minimized. The total profit is growing steadily!
This argument certainly doesn't compare with Timbo's - "Selling spot for many assets means the next day."
But nevertheless... My argument is clear to everyone here.
... Give me an example of a trading strategy that illustrates the advantage of a loca.
...i gave an example you can see above
--
i'm not saying lock is good
I see it as a technical possibility ...
It's the possibility of getting into a lock ...
doesn't take away my ability to swing clean.
and the lack of lock ... technically - will not allow me to choose movements on corrections
that's all!
I'm talking about an example of an advantage.
---
technicality:
unfortunately I don't know exactly whether it's a correction or a reversal
so enter from a possible reversal or retracement point and then retrace to Breakeven
I'm defending a long term entry - which I'm assuming will go further
I don't want to give you examples of patterns - I hope you know what I'm talking about.
--
If we go with the zigzag, the profit will be higher!
There is a suspicion that Timbo is a hired forum maker - constantly pouring oil on the fire - I don't believe he is giving his opinion - just opposing everyone to support the conversation :)
Yuraz made a good point - the lock gives time for respite - so it does some good.
I have a suspicion that Timbo is a hired forum maker - he constantly adds oil to the fire - I do not believe he speaks his mind - he just opposes everyone to support the conversation :)
Yuraz made a good point - lock gives time for a breather - so it does some good.
Well, don't be silly, Timbo is a very interesting thinker... and gives interesting information.
in fact in a big way TIMBO is right! - Swinging is actually pure pro - swinging is perfect if it's from zigzagging
but if all work from zigzags :-))
--
Lock and swing
Swing: better if you zigzag
Lock: gives you a better chance at maneuvers than swing trade
--
But again, I don't know where it's going. I'm just guessing.
and the lock gives me a chance to back up the position and be psychologically more relaxed.
-- example
i have two positions one 1200p + the second i enter on correction against the first position and back to breakeven 100p
I got a lock (I am out of the market) so I got one +11000 on the other +100 and the same 1200.
and now i don't care which order breaches breakeven
the profit on this trade is in my pocket! I can take it back any time now
i have +1200p already!
if i wake up and 100 pairs get knocked down to breakeven i am back in the market and i have to think where to cover my sell which is back in the market
--
if i have an open position!!! and i open a second one!!! so i stand in ONE POSITION
i.e. i consider both sell and buy at the same time as one position!
---
Who does not have the technical ability to lock ... used to swing
i know traders who never lock.
i myself prefer swing - but the lock is a technique that sometimes helps me
In this thread it was only about using a loc to disguise pips when there is a time limit on holding a position. Accepted, but this is not a trading strategy, but a strategy to cheat the DC.
Most likely, the author of this post is an employee or co-owner of a kitchen brokerage company.
Restrictions on the time of holding a client's position by a brokerage company are from the same series of locs bans.
And other prohibitions such as prohibition for some brokerage companies to enter into counter positions. VCs are prohibited to take opposite positions in different accounts.
Greed of brokerage companies owners has no limits. And to increase the income - we need to prohibit those tricks that allow traders to earn.
But the prohibition has to be justified. And then there are such forum visitors on the scene.
They "care" about poor brokerage companies and bring absurd arguments like the above quote "- but it's not a trading strategy, it's a strategy of Deception by brokerage companies.
It was your suggestion to measure up, not mine. I'm more interested in the facts... This applies to all lockers - rub your nose in Timbo's arrogance, give me an example of a trading strategy that illustrates the loc advantage.
Well, I see... Upside down, overhanded, pulled out... What? We don't see what's inconvenient? Oh, what a scope! :)) "To all the locksmiths"?! Already offered, but cowardly bypassed by you. There won't be a more convenient offer for you. And to prove with words... There's no ground for sowing seeds of knowledge, you know :)). Tu-134. Not interested.
Well, now the last newbie is able to figure out what's what here. Satisfied. There are theorists on this site worth reading. What sets them apart is their lack of morbid ego.
Men, the situation around the introduction of rule 2-43 from the NFA (a ban on hedging) in my opinion is as follows.
NFA has either mathematically well-founded data that the use of hedging can bring guaranteed profits for traders, or available to them the statistics show that this fact has already taken place! Consequently, there is a high probability that the trader who comes to the market with such a strategy is guaranteed to "strip" someone. That's why they have introduced such a rule on a mandatory basis in order to prevent such events in the future. And any official explanation is reminiscent of the meaning of "by popular demand of workers", which has been widely used in our recent history. You all know very well how trustworthy the Americans can be when they occupied Iraq to supposedly destroy weapons of mass destruction, which they could not even find there. In reality, they needed nothing but oil in Iraq. The same thing is happening now in terms of hedging bans for US brokers.
I think it is completely pointless to discuss in such detail a fact that has already happened (the real reasons that prompted the NFA to make such a decision are no longer important, as it is already history). Now we all need to look for measures to counter it. In my opinion at the current moment in time we have only 2 possibilities to counter it:
1. Switch to a European broker that is subject to FSA regulation rather than the NFA. I have specifically inquired about this issue and European brokers will continue to provide hedging after 15 May.
2. Split your existing account with a US broker into 2 separate accounts with an equal amount of funds. On one account all positions for all instruments will be BUY only, and on the other account all positions for all instruments will be SELL only. This rule is not violated when hedging is prohibited on one account, because we have 2 accounts. Then we need to work out a method of distributing positions of the only Expert Advisor on these 2 different accounts. Since this has not been my previous task, I would like to know what methods are available to execute orders of one Expert Advisor efficiently on 2 different accounts?
I would be grateful for information about methods of solving this problem. In general, I propose to jointly develop a software counter to NFA rule 2-43 for traders who do not want to leave American brokers.
I think it is completely pointless to discuss in such detail a fact that has already happened (the real reasons that prompted the NFA to make such a decision are no longer important, as that is already history).
Now we all need to look for measures to counter it. In my opinion at this moment in time we have only two possibilities to counter it:
Well said.
In fact, I don't use lots as a trading tool (I don't see any advantages in them, but I don't exclude that they may be useful to someone),
They form on their own as a result of using multiple TCs in the same account.
I don't use them for trading (I don't see any advantages, but it's also not ruled out that they're useful for some people.
I don't see a single solution yet. There are not only traders own accounts but also client accounts...
1. Go to a European broker that is subject to FSA regulation, not NFA. I specifically inquired about this issue and European brokers will continue to provide hedging after May 15.
An option of course, but there are counter-arguments (trading conditions, force of habit, difficulties with opening moreover if the account is not your own...)
2. Split the existing account with a US broker into 2 separate accounts with equal amount of funds. On one account all positions for all instruments will be BUY only, and on the other account all positions for all instruments will be SELL only. This rule is not violated when hedging is prohibited on one account, because we have 2 accounts.
Also an option, but if diversification worked well on one account, there will definitely be a skew on such one-sided ones.
This was pointed out by Prival.The next step is to develop a method of distributing trades of the only Expert Advisor on these 2 different accounts.
As I have not faced this problem before, I would like to know what methods are available for accurate order execution of one EA on 2 different accounts?
It is not very difficult to modify EAs for trading in 2 accounts, but they also cause much trouble and potential errors.
We take any Expert Advisor and halve it: one for buy, the other for sell.
The signal part is saved in both. The one for bays by long signal will open
Long and follow it according to the rules and/or cover by the reversal signal, but without the reversal.
The flip will occur on the other account. A sell semi-counter is similar.
.
But working on 2 accounts doesn't seem to me to be the best option.
I.e. if before someone had managed for example 25 NFA-accounts, now it will be 50? (((