Avalanche - page 223
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 see. Thank you.
Galina,
Could you please modify the Expert Advisor you have developed with consideration of not using locking positions and publish it as a demo one?
I think you may be interested in the result. I don't insist, it would just be interesting.
Да, из подобных штук после пары-тройки переворотов надо валить при первой же возможности.
А вообще, перевертыши такие - баловство.
Increasing profitability and/or reducing losses can only be achieved, it seems to me, in two ways:1. Improve the quality of predictive signals of the analytical unit.
2. Apply reversal MM (martingale, laboosher, etc.) to compensate for false signals.
In my opinion, the first is much more difficult than the second. That's why easier methods are used.
Да, из подобных штук после пары-тройки переворотов надо валить при первой же возможности.
А вообще, перевертыши такие - баловство.
Well shifters come in all shapes and sizes. The Laboucher is just an MM. We should also apply it to a more or less sane strategy, and not hope that the MM will pull in a profit, but we should look at the performance of the TS. I wrote that Laboucher is profitable with equal takes and stops at 34% of profitable trades. By the way, it often happened that with a stable lot TS was losing, but with the use of the same Lyabusher gave not a bad profit) Perhaps here Martin should be considered as a means that allows you to get a profit with a smaller percentage of profitable trades.
Увеличение профитности и/или снижение убытков можно достичь, как мне кажется, только двумя способами:1. Повышать качество прогнозных сигналов аналитического блока.
2. Применять переворотный ММ (мартингейл, лябушер и т.п.) для компенсации ложных сигналов.
На мой взгляд, первое куда сложнее второго. Вот и применяют более легкие методы.
Ahead of me while I was writing this post) That's basically what I said. Martin will allow you to make profits with fewer profitable trades. Of course it's much easier to implement than to develop a system that will give a profit on a stable lot. The same laboucher allows you to get a profit with 40% of profitable trades, and it is a failure with a stable lot. Conclusion ... do not simply throw in the basket that plummeted on a stable lot. It is quite possible that your TS has a sufficient ratio of profit / loss for that would earn the use of soft martin, but at the same time plummeting to a stable lot. Nada look at the performance of TS. If the TS with equal stops at take-outs gives at least 35% of profitable trades by experience I would say that it makes sense to screw it up with a simple Martin.Galina,
Could you please modify the Expert Advisor you have prepared taking into account the fact that you are not using locking positions and publish it as a demo?
I think you may be interested in the result. I don't insist, it would just show
And martin added to this strategy (I mean trapping), will only increase the risks.
К сожалению этот принцип вряд ли будет рабочим.
Так же и мартин прикрученный к этой стратегии (я о ловине), добавит только лишнии риски
Stupid people... how they put these locs in their heads. But they don't want to think for themselves. It'll be the same without the locks. Exactly the same. I am telling you as a person who traded for years on MT4 and netting. And I'm fully responsible for what I'm saying. There is no difference, and can't be. But with lots in MT4 the risks are really enormous, because of the margin winding. I don't have enough free funds to open positions much earlier than in netting. There is no difference in money and no difference in risk, it appears only with lots, and only on the fact of margin accrual. And the margin winding up will lead to an earlier loss, which is what your idiotic Expert Advisor is condemned to. Use your head. Put it in netting and reduce the risks just a fraction of the time.
I really wish you would turn yours off.... what have you got instead of a head there .... >> I don't know what to call this tool correctly.....
Rude to perfectly justified remarks. You made a shitty advice, and a little criticism, and quite fair criticism...immediately turn on the fool, and rudeness begins. I didn't expect that from you... and such stupidity and rudeness. You made a gibberish, and your words are answered right away in the bushes... like a fool... nyu... nyu... go ahead.By the way, did you manage to calculate the margin on the given links, or is there no way to do it?
К сожалению этот принцип вряд ли будет рабочим.
Так же и мартин прикрученный к этой стратегии (я о ловине), добавит только лишнии риски
I don't quite understand you. Especially the second sentence.By tracking your demo trading, it becomes obvious: the MM is based on a margin (lot sizes and pending order levels are clear about that).
So what additional risks were you referring to when using a martin, if you already use it?
Or did you mean something else?
Why doesn't the "no locks" principle seem to work for you? All in all, it is essentially the same thing.
So the profit margin should be similar and the drawdown should be lower.
I think at least the second argument points in favor of upgrading the Expert Advisor.
Am I wrong in something?
Or in your opinion, the argument of drawdown reduction due to elimination of lots is not proven?