Do you have any tactics for dealing with the loca? - page 26
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
OK, let's go at it from the other side.
I have three different strategies: long term, medium term and short term.
In MT4 I put them in the same terminal and go ahead.
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?
Yes, I see your point.
It is clear that the aggregate will move. Your calculations are clear too.
In a netting system, I cannot close 1 lot open at 1.2100. But I can calculate the volume to be closed, so the result on the balance will be the same, i.e. equivalent to the opening of the second and third poses. In principle this will be enough, I hope.
How it won't work, why it won't work
SELL ! ( ONE ) LOT.
In sum, they may well open opposite trades to each other, although the strategies themselves are strictly reversal.
What should I do in MT5?
Open three different accounts?
OK, let's go at it from the other side.
I have three different strategies: long term, medium term and short term.
In MT4 I put them in the same terminal and go ahead.
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?
I already answered a similar question. You ignore it or don't read it...
That's a pity.
And the prog will have to be rewritten anyway. Put in my recommendations about takeprofits and stoplosses.
I seem to be leaning towards the same option too.
That's crazy.
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 way, because I'm right, 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 the player's ego and his commitment to the idea of lock, you can find a stable positive relationship close to one.
How not, why not
SELL ! ( ONE ) LOT
It is mathematically impossible to prove the advantage of locs (because there is no such advantage). That's why people come up with the idea of
I think that if you calculate the correlation between a player's eg and his adherence to the idea of locs, you can find a stable positive correlation close to unity.
Answer in this thread?
Yep :)
Would you be so kind as to calculate the table, please? Maybe I'm a fool, I do not understand and do not know all the charms of netting? Help me understand, please.
FreeLance:
I don't know why. I will simply repeat the rule - instead of TP, put an order of the opposite direction, but with the volume as "closed" by TP.
And be netting you.
What do you think I am trying to show here?
I want to show that a trap in a 5 is more logical than in a 4.
;)