"The 'perfect' trading system - page 51
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
Still, Victor, this is the third time I've said it: you seem to be trading not the price, but the history of trades. I.e. the whole highlight of the system is in the MM, not in the analytical signals. This is the road to nowhere, no matter how many good mines with bad play you make.
1.
double price = (iOpen( NULL, timeframe, 1 )+iHigh( NULL, timeframe, 1 )+iLow( NULL, timeframe, 1 )+iClose( NULL, timeframe, 1 ))/4;
if( MathAbs(price-pricePrev) >= StopBase ) {
pricePrev = price;
As you can see - price is used everywhere.
Moreover, there can be many synchronization methods - not necessarily by a stop loss.
Moreover, here is this code, which according to you points to trading history trades:
if( resultTransaction > 0 ) {
// the last trade is profitable
arrayProfit[currentIndex] = maxProfit-spred*3;
arrayLoss[currentIndex] = StopBase+spred*7;
}
else
if( resultTransaction < 0 ) {
// the last trade was losing
arrayProfit[currentIndex] = StopBase-spred*3;
arrayLoss[currentIndex] = drawDown+spred*7;
// change the direction of trades
currentBuySell = -currentBuySell;
}
optional - this is just a special case - one of possible implementations.
2. Lot size is constant - external parameter, i.e. MM is not used in adaptive EA.
extern double absAmount = 0.1; // absolute lot size
To the point, Victor.
1. The first piece of code is almost entirely your NextBar() function, which triggers the possibility to open a position. This is all your analytics related to the price. Further, judging by the code of the start() function, there is pure accounting of trade results, and not the analysis of the price itself.
Are you trading on a breakout or rebound? No.You don't use the sign of the price-pricePrev expression itself, and the trade direction is selected on the basis of the last trade result (profit/loss).
Thus, all analytics is actually only deal timing, and most importantly, the direction of the deal, is determined without price analysis.
Well this is trading history trading, not price trading.
2. By MM I mean a more general interpretation of trade history trading, not just changing lot size.
You must be wondering, how such a small "fragment" of code could earn +496% profit in just 2 months?
There's nothing surprising about that. It's just that brevity is the sister of talent :)
To the point, Victor.
1. The first piece of code is almost entirely your NextBar() function, which triggers the possibility to open a position. This is all your analytics related to the price. Further, judging by the code of the start() function, there is pure accounting of trade results, and not the analysis of the price itself.
Are you trading on a breakout or rebound? No. You don't use the sign of price-pricePrev itself, and the trade direction is selected on the basis of the last trade result (profit/loss).
So all the analytics is actually just the timing of the transaction, and most importantly, the direction of the transaction, is determined without price analysis.
Well that's trading deal history, not price trading.
2. By MM I mean a more general interpretation of trading history of trades, not just changing lot size.
1. I really don't understand what you think "price trading" means.
If I buy at 10 and sell at 20, that is price trading.
If I buy at 10, and want to sell at 20 - I have set a limit, then that is a "trade of price" - because before I decide to buy at 10, I have to assume that I will be able to sell at 20 afterwards.
That's what I think.
Explain what you mean by that.
2. In such a general interpretation, then everything can be called MM, even the act of trading itself. What's the point in that?
I understand MM as money management - literally. There is a balance and money management by changing the size of trade volumes, depending on the balance/equity.
But the adaptive EA does not use the value of balance/equity in any way - it doesn't care how much money is available for trading.
Therefore, there is no MM in the adaptive EA.
Perhaps this code confuses you:
double resultTransaction = AccountEquity()-equityPrev;
I just didn't know in a hurry how to get the result of the last transaction :)
In the full-featured version, done without using AccountEquity().
There is no concept of 'analytics/analysis' in Adaptive EA and OTT.
Explain what you mean by that.
Price trading is deciding when to enter a trade and the direction of the trade depending on price behaviour (perhaps still tick volume) - without analysing the results of previous trades.
MM is the ability to change the volume of a position opened depending on trading results.
I understand MM as money management - literally. There is a balance and there is money management, by changing the size of trade volumes, depending on the balance/equity.
However adaptive EA does not use the balance/equity - it doesn't care how much money is available for trade.
Consequently, there is no MM in adaptive EAs.
Almost, but not quite. I already wrote: depending on trading results, not just balance/equity.
Almost all of your Expert Advisor is almost pure MM: the direction of a new trade is chosen depending on the result of the previous one. The only thing that is influenced by the price of an instrument is the deal timing.
In the adaptive EA and OTT there is no concept of "analytics/analysis".
Well yes, that's how it comes out. You have almost no analytics, one of the main components of trading (apart from timing, which is completely disconnected from determining the direction of a future trade).
It is a dead end to be guided solely by the history of trades.
The trade direction is chosen based on the result of the last trade (profit/loss).
Judged from the code, yes, it is the choice of transaction direction - a special case.
In general it is correlation of NF with FR.
I.e. if SF differs (does not fit) from FR too much (it is shown as triggering of a stop loss), then we "synchronize" - we should choose more suitable other SF or its part.
Price trading is about deciding when to enter a trade and the direction of the trade depending on price behaviour (perhaps even tick volume) - without analysing the results of previous trades.
MM is the ability to change the volume of a position opened depending on trading results.
Almost, but not quite. I've already written: depending on trade results, not just balance/equity.
Almost all of your EA is almost pure MM: the direction of the open trade is chosen depending on the result of the previous trade. The only thing that is influenced by the price of an instrument is the deal timing.
According to your definition, there is no MM in the adaptive EA - the volume of the trade does not change - it is constant all the time.
You see the code of the adaptive EA through the "prism of TA", so you see only "hints" of MM.
The process of synchronization is not a choice of a deal direction, depending on the previous one.
For example, when you swing a swing with your hand, you must move your hand synchronously with the movement of the swing so as to push it at the right moment. If you try to push the swing asynchronously, you will hit it painfully with your arm or you will not have time to touch it at all.
Arm movement and swing movement are two different processes.
NF and FR are also two different processes - they develop on their own, until the moment of synchronisation arrives.
Then, the FR 'pushes' the SF in the 'right' direction.
We seem to have a misunderstanding of terms. What I meant was this: You've pretty much thrown the instrument price analysis (TA) out of the trade and made everything, apart from the opening timing, dependent on the result of the last trade.
OK, let it not be MM, I'm already confused myself. Vince has something similar called balance/equity line trading.
I don't believe you can successfully trade with little or no regard for the price of an instrument.
Your 20 trades that increased your deposit by 500% are not statistics yet. Statistics will be when there are many trades, at least in hundreds. I want to believe that everything will turn out well. We are waiting.
We seem to have a misunderstanding of terms. What I meant was the following: You've pretty much thrown the instrument price analysis (TA) out of the trade and made everything, apart from the opening timing, dependent on the result of the last trade.
OK, let it not be MM, I'm already confused myself. Vince has something similar called balance/equity line trading.
I do not believe that you can successfully trade without paying attention to instrument price.
Your 20 trades that increased the deposit by 500% are not yet statistics. The statistics will be available when there are a lot of deals, at least in hundreds. I would like to believe that you will succeed. Wait for it.
You don't believe it and you are right :)
The thing is that the price is always fluctuating in a very wide range and it is always possible to choose in advance the NF that best fits these price fluctuations and opens a position at the most opportune moment.
This process takes place at the optimization stage - of course it is kind of absent in the code - the process is "behind the scenes".
sleight of hand and no cheating :)