Do you have any tactics for dealing with the loca? - page 27
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
This is insane.
That's all, and not only that, but other problems unseen by you now have been discussed and more than once:
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/120850
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/119439
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/116710
The table still hasn't been counted. That's all right, then.
Good night, everyone. :)
The table still hasn't been counted. That's all right, then.
Good night, everybody. :)
Good night, then.
You can count it yourself. Knowing where and when you opened.
Close with the counter in mt5.
Then estimate the result. ;)
We will continue tomorrow.
Netreba will also come along - he's "also" in the lok. ;)
Well yes, it's equivalent to covering the bai for 1 lot. But not equivalent to my task - to cover the 1st open order exactly from the price at which it was opened and by the same volume.
I'm awake now.
This would only be necessary if you have three separate unlinked tools trading in the same account.
For convenience, let us take an analogy: in one company (one account number) there is one accounting department and three unrelated areas of activity
The Accounting Department has to keep independent accounts for each business line
In MT4 every EA keeps its own magics and the resulting balance is not its problem
In MT5 you will either have to merge logic of 3 tools into one EA or keep the virtual accounting for each direction
I don't think the latter is very hard for you, it's just simple maths
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no difference in the trading results on mt4 and mt5
i would like to use my handy and easy to use trading robots in mt5
and it was convenient, although not logical
i'm ready to prove (not today) that youcan earn more with mt5 than with mt4
By the way, there is a curious table above. Can you recalculate it to netting?
Here you go.
Good night.
You can do the counting yourself. knowing where and when you opened.
Close with the counter in mt5.
Then estimate the result. ;)
We will continue tomorrow.
Netreba will come too - he is "also" in the stock. ;)
->
OK, let's go at it from another angle.
I have three different strategies: long term, medium term and short term.
In MT4 I put them into one terminal and go.
In total, they may well open opposite trades to each other, although the strategies themselves are strictly reversible.
What should I do in MT5?
Open three different accounts?
And finally, a little differently. Let's imagine three successful traders. One is a short-term trader, another one is a medium-term trader, and the third one is a long-term trader. All three of them trade independently of each other. They have different strategies. But if we look at their trades, we will find that they often open in opposite directions. Note that they did not lock.
Such trading on one account, replacing these three traders, is impossible neither with netting, nor with forbidden locks.
That's it, amen.
Comments required. Each opening and closing of a trade causes the total net position of the account and the exposure price to change. Red - net sells, blue - net bai. Green are recorded results. By the way, the actual result should be slightly higher than the previous one (I just took prices from the author's table, and in fact if the net position goes down - we save on the spread.
I wanted you to first understand the general logic of netting, because I feel that practically no one understands it or is unable to explain it.
Mathematically it is impossible to prove the advantage of locks (because there is no such advantage). So people come up with all sorts of psychology and other nonsense. Mentality of our Ivan the Fool characteristic behavior of the type "wiser in the morning" (better to postpone until tomorrow to solve the problem that arose today). In addition, the psychology of the player does not give up until the last moment. "Close a losing position?!!! No, you may not, because I'm right anyway, sooner or later the market will reverse in my favor. And I'll prove that I'm right no matter what it costs me!". But in this case the player's hypertrophied ego turns into a great number of ridiculous theories about so-called effectiveness of a lock, about that lock cannot be replaced in some cases, and so on and so forth.
I think that if you calculate the correlation between a player's eg and his commitment to the idea of lock, you can find a stable positive correlation close to one.
Let me once again quote Denis Orlov -
About locks: A lock is different from a stop, just like a drawdown is different from a stop loss, from Breakeven, or even from a profit.
A stop is an accepted loss, a loss of funds.
Lock is a fixed drawdown, with the possibility of waiting for the reversal, but still be able to earn on the drawdown. And you can always close it like a stop loss, minus swaps of course.
I think everything depends on the strategy. I think the lock is applicable to the reversal strategy when the reversal is "postponed" but highly probable.
You couldn't have said it better.
And what did you mean by your post?
That you are D'Artagnan among the "mithrophanous"?
The table still hasn't been counted. That's fine.
Good night, everyone. :)
If no one does tomorrow, I'll do it.
Although it's strange why you shouldn't do it yourself.
Here you go.
Yay, no need to make a spreadsheet.
but they should be the ones trying to prove something with two tables