Avalanche - page 43
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
рассказал свое видение вопроса, ищет единомышленников. Нет, каждому надо обозвать его плохими словами и посмеяться, как будто у каждого уже есть
Put it on monitoring, already made 100 .
Put it up for monitoring, already made 100 .
>> where can we see?
Но зашли и убедились - что вот оно опять... Опять и снова... опять тот же вдоль и поперек просчитанный и предсказанный опостылевший мартин.
А активное обсуждение идет скорее всего потому - что топикстартер черезчур уверен. даже не хочет включить элементарный калькулятор и посчитать разницу между одним сливом и одним профитом:)
And as sever29 rightly pointed out, no EA has yet been presented that fully reflects the Avalanche strategy.
That is, all those testing on history are testing something of their own.
Если все в один голос заявляют, что это сливная ТС, то задумайтесь... это говорят те самые 98%, из них 1-2 % хитрожопых, которые сами на этом зарабатывают. Если все говорят об одном, то задумайтесь... Если кто-то что запрещает, то это означает, что именно это может ему навредить, а адресатам запрета помочь... Все критики предложенной ТС являются трейдерами с "тунельным" мышлением (моя аватара тому подтверждение), а их как известно большинство, как выше говорил- парачка из них хитрожопых.
Beginning to understand... Bravo.
А Железный Джон красава, симпатичны личности, которые прут на нерест против течения.
За последнее время, второй уже... побольше б таких
"To be strong is to be lonely. Every man is lonely. The strong accepts and blesses his loneliness. The weak runs away from it."
"When you try to learn about yourself from others, you give them power over you. So be your own measure of what happens to you."
And as sever29 rightly pointed out, no EA has yet been presented that fully reflects the Avalanche strategy.
.
I don't understand, why didn't you like mine?
There are thousands of variations of this strategy, which are all simply referred to as martingale. It does not matter in what proportion and in what way.
The lot is either increased to the losing side, hoping for a pullback and getting the equtiity in the plus side. Or vice versa, the lot is increasing to the profit side, hoping for the continuation of the movement.
In the first case the deposit will be killed by a sustained trend, in the second case (like yours) - by a prolonged flat (which is much more likely).
The algorithm behind the Expert Advisor is exactly yours... To the nearest comma, as they say. You can download, run in visual mode in the tester and see it. It's just that it's much faster to see the end result on the Expert Advisor than to test it on a demo in real time.
Now to the number of steps. The more reversals we allow, the more robust the strategy is. Three reversals and closing of the entire strategy is a very fast drawdown.
I took hypothetically for my test - allowable 10 reversals
3 reversals in a row - will occur much more often... Practically every day
Now calculate the profit/loss ratio.
hypothetically with a corridor of 40 p and 0.1 lot
0.1+0.2+0.4 loss would be 40/2=20*0.7=140 quid
profit=40p*0.1=40 quid
ie to cover one single loss = you need at least 4 times to catch luck.
Based on the irrefutable axiom that the price does not depend on anything, and to predict the future movement is impossible in principle - the probability that the price will wobble in the corridor 3 times and the probability that the price will go 3 times in the right direction are identical. i.e. 0.5. I.e. probability of one loss and probability of 3 profits are equal.
count the difference.
1 loss at 140 bucks=140
3 profits at 40 bucks=120.
Already in minus.
And considering the fact that the price is mainly in flat according to the multi-year history - the probability of swinging is higher than the probability of a trend. But we won't take it into account, because by the conditions of the problem flat and trend probabilities are identical. (though it is not so in practice).
This is a hypothetical example... One can experiment with the corridor width and make the profit smaller than the corridor, for example, the corridor has 40 points, and the profit is only 1 point. Then the probability of profit will certainly increase many times. But the difference between one profit and one loss will also increase repeatedly.
For example, in this case we need 140 times to catch luck to gain one profit.)
In general the result will be the same in any case.
What is actually proved by the test.
>>where can I see it?
>> https://www.mql5.com/go?link=http://rogersignals.com/ru/master.php?master=LavinaИ как справедливо отметил sever29, пока не было представлено ни одного советника, полностью отражающего стратегию "Лавина".
My EA reflects your strategy exactly to the decimal point. Download it in the tester in the visual and point the finger where I deviated from your strategy.