NFA bans locking from 15 May 2009 - page 35
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
Why are you confusing yourself and getting scared? What's "kilometres open"? It's simpler than that.
If as a result of your analysis you (or your system) have come to the conclusion that it is profitable to buy XXX now - it is cheap, then you buy it in volume according to your MM. When you decide that XXX is too expensive, you sell it, in accordance with your MM. Selling and buying the same thing at the same time is schizophrenia, pluralism of opinion in one's head.
You don't follow any opening/closing, you only follow the valuation of XXX, not even its price - price is irrelevant. Accordingly, there are only three states: buy, hold (asset or cache), sell. That's what you trade on, that's what you keep track of.
I haven't felt like we're talking about different things for a long time now.
...
Selling and buying the same thing at the same time is schizophrenia, pluralism of opinion in one's head.
...
And if not at the same time?
And you wished to see a description of the logic of a real councillor?
Initially accepting that your unsubstantiated assertions are the truth and the rest of us here are rubbish?
No need to sign for everyone, it was a case in point. Pictures do not prove anything. If you don't want to explain what it shows and how it was received, it is rubbish.
No need to sign for everyone, it was a case in point. Pictures do not prove anything. If you don't want to explain what is shown there and how you got it, it is rubbish.
For the tankers.
The screenshots are not posted for showmanship. The point is that the use of a positive lock MIGHT increase profitability of an EA (with almost the same drawdown), compared to the same one without a lock.
For the tankers.
The screenshots are not posted for exhibition purposes.
What for, excuse me?
I am just saying that positive lock can more than double profitability of an EA (with almost the same drawdown), compared to the EA without it.
Sorry, on the upper chart or on the lower one? I don't see "more than double" profitability there.
In general, clarity of mind is clarity of presentation. You have so far only shown vague graphs and mysterious puffing of cheeks.
Then what is it for, I'm sorry?
In literature, there are writers and there are critics. They can't live without each other :)
For the tankers.
The screenshots are not for demonstration purposes. I just want to say that positive lock can increase profitability of Expert Advisor (with almost the same drawdown) compared to profitability of an EA without a lock.
This is unsubstantiated nonsense. Take one particular example, draw what you like on it and present the picture as proof. In common parlance, this is called fitting.
Sorry, on the upper chart or on the lower chart? There's something about a "more than double" profit not being seen there.
No words. )
It's unsubstantiated nonsense. Take one particular example, draw what you like on it and present the picture as proof. In common parlance it's called fitting.
In response I can say: declaring locs useless (even harmful) is just as unsubstantiated ... you know what.
>> I don't want to continue the argument any further.
In response I can say: declaring locs useless (even harmful) is just as unsubstantiated ... you know what.
I don't want to argue any further.
There's nothing to argue about, you littered with pictures, it was pointed out to you. Loki had nothing to do with it at all.