Is there a need for a lock in MT5? - page 8
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
Does equity drawdown count?
I ran an EA from 1999 till today. I gave it $300 -> it did not lose money. See equity on the picture. What is equity, in fact, if I'm on the block 90% of the time?
I haven't even shown EA's stats yet, where there's a little distance between the poses. It's quite a giggle there.
If that's a threat then I agree giggling is much better than shitting.....
How much more money would have to be loaded into the depot with this logic?
Bravo. By the way, this could be a way to use lot strategies on net trading without much rework. Interesting. I'll have to think about it.
Ugh - my head is completely confused. I have never had a single drawbar expert! Why am I asking?))
There is one function that will serve as a buffer between the decision centre and the executing part.
How much more money would have to be loaded into the depot with this logic?
Since there will be no lok poses, you will need less money.
Well, here's one of those "for something" things.
I got a profitable buy on the euro this morning.
Now I'm occasionally sitting on peaks...
At the bottom there is a sell-stop, in case the cletta opens and the turtles go crazy...
)))
At that, I stopped at 0 on the Buy, once I took a Sell, and set a pause on this size of pips.
So the stop may not be pulled down for no reason.
Or in general, if the pair will go to the south, I will close the current Lok. The pause will be nailed down.
So, I have a choice...
But on the netting, I'd have to..:
close the buy and open the sell and wait and see what happens.
I see it now, but it was not so good this morning... ;)
So, the losing sells are a temporary measure, or a means to fix the profit/position.
And these deals didn't change my initial position on the chart! (I mean position).
If it's a threat, I'll take a giggle, it's much better than shitting.....
God with you what a threat. The purpose -> to show ONE of the options for using the loco. And shit... don't give a shit about the world as it is, at least look in the heart of Moscow...
Well, here's one of those "for something" things.
I got a profitable buy on the euro this morning.
Now I'm occasionally sitting on peaks...
At the bottom there is a sell-stop, in case the cletta opens and the turtles go crazy...
)))
And earlier I had a 0 stop on Buy, I took a Sell once and set a pause on this size of pips.
To avoid that the stop was not drawn down for no reason...
Or in general, if the pair goes south, I would close the current order. A pending order would be nailed down.
So there is a choice...
But on the netting, I would have to
close the buy and open the sell, and wait and see what happens.
I see it now, but it was not so good this morning... ;)
So, the losing sells are a temporary measure, or a means to fix the profit/position.
And these deals didn't change my initial position on the chart! (I mean position).
That's an option. What if we wait a day WITHOUT touching the LOCK? The price might come back?!
It's all about one function that will serve as a buffer between the decision centre and the executing part.
Exactly. The first constructive thought I've seen in all this loco-phrenia.
Gentlemen! Maybe, instead of bickering, you should think about how to make a painless transition with your cockroaches - pardon - with lochs - not to net trade. Here seems to be one way suggested.
I.e. an interface is created, a driver, a buffer - whatever - which will be responsible for transferring virtual locks into real net trading.
That's an option. What if we wait a day without touching the lock? The price might come back?!
Why wait for anything?
Just wait for the weather...