Who does JAPAN LIGHTS shine on? - page 4
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 often use this combinationB but you still need to watch where it is formed
They are very similar to zigzags: Just like ZZ, candlesticks wonderfully show you on historical data where and when and how to trade. But to work on the current bar which has "nothing on the right" yet.... eagle or tardy (IMHO).
No!!! There's no delay!!! We go straight in at the first signal... For example last Friday...
2 trades, 2 profits, but on the stop, did not reach the target... It really wasn't an easy day... with false breaks and so on.
But there was no lag... everything's clear and in accordance with the rules.
It all depends on the system and how you approach it...
The further I go, the less I want to do anything with them. Real combinations are formed with a delay of at least the "width of the combination" (e.g. 3 candles). The delay of three hours when working on the hourly chart is very big.
They are very similar to a zigzag to me: just like ZZ candlesticks wonderfully show you on historical data where and when and how you should trade. But to work on the current bar which has "nothing on the right" yet.... eagle or tardy (IMHO).
For me, one bar is easier and "cheaper", in my opinion, to predict than movements from several bars.
I use weeks (+ days), on smaller TF I trade in the direction of the forecast made for the week. So far on one instrument.
The major problem here (for days and higher) is lack of history to estimate the found statistic advantage. An option is to go lower on one or several TFs, but there is another problem - "bars with long shadows" because of them the number of "good" patterns reduces dramatically.
I'll add a bit more pessimism...
I already wrote about it once, there was a case: a man gave me the rules of signals for entry and asked to enter them into the Expert Advisor, and showed me his story on the chart, where these signals gave him a good profit. When I pointed to these places, he surprisingly confirmed that the signals were there, but we should not use them to enter. My point? The point is that candlesticks work when they work and everybody notices it. And when they shouldn't work, traders filter it and do not notice the signal. It's like a black cat's omen, but on the contrary: one remembers everything successful and believes the system works, but in fact all these candlesticks are just visible foam on the steep wave of something more serious.
When I poked him in these places, he was surprised to confirm that there were signals, but that it was impossible to enter them. My point? The point is that candlesticks work when they work and everyone notices it. And when they shouldn't work, the trader filters them and does not notice that there is a signal.
Well, this is a tough case, lack of systematic trading as such.
For example, there is a signal tested on a long history that gives advantage (on history). When it appears "now", all cases must be worked out, regardless of "what seems to be". Of course, it is not the fact that they (the signals) will give the same advantage as before.
a little more pessimism...
What's my point? The point is that candlesticks work when they work and everyone notices it. And when they shouldn't work, a trader filters them out and does not notice that there is a signal.
B - we should somehow formalize what he is filtering. Or at least figure out how to attach a neuron to it. Because this "I can see where the price is going to go" problem is common to many people. Maybe it is a collective glitch. I wish we could use it. :)
2.5/3 (profit/stop) is quite good.
I just don't understand why you need trailing? If there is trailing (I don't mean just moving to Breakeven), then you're not sure of your TP level or something else?
I think we should reach either profit or loss, or exit by time (+ transfer of current deal to Breakeven is possible). And it is better to test the system without trail.
I would like to know what parameters of the pre-bar(s) were used to find the cherished patterns?
No!!! Not 2.5/3, but from 2.5 to 3, or even 4
I.e. the profit is at least 2.5 times the loss. I move it to breakeven first, and then I move it to the high/low of previous bars
I use a ratio:
- between upper and lower shadows e.g. 1/3 or 1/5
- The difference between the highs/lows of a candlestick, for example candlesticks below xx pips are not considered
- Analysis of a candlestick's high/low with the high/low of a previous candlestick (4 bars to the left)
- Stop is obligatory on the candlestick's high/low after which the pose is opened
- After a while, start trawling through the high/low of previous candles
That's basically all for now, but I'm still looking for something ... It's a long way to the finish line...
a little more pessimism to add...
I already wrote about it once, I had a case: a guy once gave me the rules of signals for entry, and asked to set them in the Expert Advisor and showed his history on the chart where these signals gave him a good profit. When I pointed to these places, he surprisingly confirmed that the signals were there, but we should not use them to enter. My point? The point is that candlesticks work when they work and everybody notices it. And when they shouldn't work, traders filter it and do not notice the signal. It's a kind of a black cat's omen but on the contrary: all successful ones are remembered and the system is considered to work, but in fact all those candlesticks are just visible foam on the steep wave of something more serious.
Yes I know there are false signals... I see them on the chart after the test, but there are fewer of them!!! It's just that more often they are triggered than not.
It's just a matter of stat advantage!!! I think there is no system that gives 100% signals!!! Mine only gives 55% + profit/stop=2.5 That's the profit...
I want to destroy my own grail:))
I've been thinking... there's a belief that one and the same expert trades differently in different DCs, understandably... different quotes, slightly different charts, spikes, etc.
If even indicator-based EAs trade differently, the Expert Advisor that analyzes only bars will be especially critical for brokerage companies quotes. I propose to try it with different brokerage companies. I will send mql4-file to all of those who agreed, on condition I will place my sitemap from 2008,01,01 till today with quality of modeling 90%. If you have any questions, please, reply to us, please let us know about brokerage company, where you may test it.