Diablo - page 6

New comment
 
JonKatana:


I see... What if we delete all orders and close positions when the price reaches level 5? It touches and we take it all down... or it touched, rolled back one level - we don't wait for a strong pullback, we take it all down. If your system does not lose at all up to the 5th level, should we logically delete everything when the price touches this level?

That way we will "cut off" the trend and let the price play between +5 and -5 levels.

 
sever30:


I see... What if we delete all orders and close positions when the price reaches level 5? It touched and we're pulling it all down... It touched, rolled back one level - we do not wait for a strong pullback and take it all down. If your system does not lose at all up to the 5th level, is it logical to delete everything when the price touches that level?

This way we will "trim" the trend and let the price frolic between +5 and -5 levels

We could do it that way. The disadvantages are the possible loss of profit (if price continues to move) and the need to control during the day (which I got rid of in Diablo).
 
JonKatana:

I propose a universal order placing scheme using Rabbit levels. A script for automatic placing of orders according to this scheme:

< oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink.

Diablo at any price movement pattern for the day closes either in profit (one to several Rabbit levels), or in zero (minus spreads).

Stupid question: Why do we need such a universal scheme, if we already have

JonKatana:

Avalanche - a win-win trading system that allows you to enter the market at any time on any instrument.

и

JonKatana:

Everyone who wanted, got experts trading on Avalanche (there are enough of them in the branch even now) and are quietly making money.

???

Who's paying for this circus?

 

I'm neither for nor against, in the morning I did as Katana said, everything seemed to follow the instructions, now it's evening, the ill-fated 5th level has not happened yet...

vertical line, that's the time of placing orders.

we're looking at it now...

 
JonKatana:
You can do it that way. The disadvantages are the possible loss of profit (if price continues to move) and the need to control during the day (which I got rid of in Diablo).

Hi! where have you been.... did you go catching an "avalanche"? or did you go to the "JP Morgan research group" to exchange experiences? or maybe you did an internship with Soros?
 
gip:

A completely idiotic question: why do we need this one-size-fits-all scheme when we already have -

Avalanche needs a large deposit for collateral with a large number of spreads and control. Diablo does not need either of these - the deposit is calculated in advance based on the number of orders placed, control is not needed - you just need to spend five minutes in the morning and five minutes in the evening. If the price moves well or the most profitable trajectories, Diablo brings up to 30% of the deposit profit per day and maybe even more. In Avalanche we trade with a much smaller (with the same deposit size) lot, which gives less profit. In Diablo there may be negative closes, but they are rare and small. Profits on most other days are many times greater than the occasional loss.
 
JonKatana:
Avalanche needs a big deposit for collateral with lots of reversals and control. Diablo does not need either of these - the deposit is calculated in advance based on the number of orders placed, control is not needed - just spend five minutes in the morning and five minutes in the evening. If the price moves well or the most profitable trajectories, Diablo brings up to 30% of the deposit profit per day, and maybe even more. In Avalanche we trade with a much smaller (with the same deposit size) lot, which gives less profit. In Diablo there may be negative closes, but they are rare and small. Profits on most other days are many times greater than the occasional loss.


The bottom line is that no one has ever made a profit on a "break-even avalanche" and everyone has seen the losses. And the inspired lies continue.

I still don't understand the motive behind this lie. Is someone paying for it? Or does it just feel good to be popular?

Or is there hope that someone will find the formula and share it?

 

I think it's possible to make it OK - you should write a calculator for all trajectories for this Diablo.

Like... price in the middle - top-bottom - orders.

So, let's go. Initial two variants - go up - go down.

Or we may test it somehow on each bar by history.

 
gip:


In the end, no one ever made any money on the "break-even avalanche" and everyone saw the losses. And the inspired lies continue.

Both claims are lies.
 
JonKatana:
Both statements are lies.


You started both threads with outright lies and you're trying to accuse me of lying? Chuckle.

Don't dodge the question, though. Why are you here? Why are you lying? Profit or fun?

I don't see any links to referrals and EAs for sale. I doubt that you're being shared with DCs, but who knows? So why lie so enthusiastically?

12345678910111213...28
New comment