A grid of pending STOP orders for the three pairs EUR/USD, EUR/JPY, USD/JPY - page 5
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 have been working on this system for a year and a half, but seeing your keen interest in the system I will give you some food for thought, which I have faced and am still looking for a solution, The system is based on 3 pairs, you put buy and sell, say usd-jpy is redundant here because it is a relatively weak pair, the place of buy or sell is not very good to say the least plus the same, I propose to take the combination of pairs to those that you have, which are eur\usd and eur\jpy add gbp\usd and gbp\jpy? The difference in the pips value has not changed, except for a very strong market, like during the Japan crisis. But when the market stabilizes, it returns to the same place. The problem was that i couldn't choose the ideal ratio between orders and timeframe to enter the market, but now i use this lot in 4 pairs, it's very convenient,i hope you may use it, if you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you! I will try it!
FoxUA I'll leave you alone as a moderator, please write clearly and legibly in short, chopped up sentences, and paragraphs, do you understand what I have written?
P.S. This is your last warning.
FoxUA I'll leave you alone as a moderator, please write clearly and legibly in short, chopped up sentences, and paragraphs, do you understand what I have written?
P.S. This is your last warning.
It's not a question of grammar, it's the fact that the combined text is not well understood. I, for example, could not finish reading it.
granit77: Если действительно поделить текст на отдельные фразы, то читать можно будет нормально.
Well, it turns out that before data can be properly understood it needs additional preprocessing designed to make it digestible (not even to decipher it, as some local pundits do, but simply to bring it up to an average standard of literacy).
OK, I went overboard. That was hyperbole. I withdraw my warning back.
Focusing on FoxUA's response here (underlined in bold):
OK, FoxUA, no need to make excuses. This is a better paragraph:
There are still quite a few mistakes, but far fewer; you could even say it's not bad!
Just try to write a few sentences per paragraph. That is, at least sometimes within a paragraph put a full stop. Otherwise, you begin to read the paragraph of 5-6 lines, and there is only one sentence (here's a mystery, just like your favorite Dostoevsky). By the end of the sentence you forget how the paragraph began.
Hello, dear traders. I've been trading forex for 5 years. I have been testing different take/loss ratio for a long time and the results are very interesting. The most viable test accounts turned out to be those with take/looss ratio = 3 to 1 or better. If take was more than loss about 7-8-10 times then it's too bad and I plumed too, if to calculate the probability of their triggering and do the opposite, ie take was much less than loss - I plumed everything quickly anyway. So, I've been studying the results of different grid systems lately and I haven't found one variant, neither in the form of Expert Advisors nor in the form of manual systems. To be honest, it is very simple and I don't understand why nobody writes about it.
The essence is this. I have tested this grid in the Strategy Tester and on a demo account. The grid interval is 5 points, 10 stop orders in each direction, generally, everything is the same. The specific feature here is that there are no stops, and (attention) takeovers. To be honest I don't understand why they put points without stops in the grid. I did the following: I created this grid using scripts and here are three variants of events:
1. The market went only in one direction, and as soon as 1-2 orders triggered in one direction, i.e. there were clean unlocked positions, I fixed a small profit and removed the entire grid, then set it up again
2. The market touched several orders, then turned around and started to collect orders from the other side. I also fixed a small profit as soon as aggregate profit on all trades appeared, including loss-making ones. And here I used to fix both pluses and minuses, as a result I got the same profit as in the first case, but there were no dangles, then I removed all orders that did not work and set all the nets and set everything anew
3. This is the most unfavorable and unlikely variant. All 20 trades triggered 10 of each. This variant is very rare and occurs only when the set is left for a long time, when the user is away from the computer or the Internet connection is down. So we get 10 lots and the grid is broken up because it was not closed in time. 3rd case is force majeure, but we should be guided by it, therefore cumulative loss of all lots should not exceed 30-40% of the deposit, well, that is at the discretion of each one.
So here we go. The results obtained in the Demo and Forex Tester were quite acceptable and the 3rd variant did not fall out during the years of testing. Taking into account the fact that the net is removed as soon as there is a profit equal to one net trade with 5-10 points profit, we worked very well with it during the flat. At sharp trend and news movements it was physically impossible to fix the whole net even with scripts in time, and as the result the profit was much larger than in the flat.
It is also quite feasible to write an Expert Advisor that would monitor (!) the total profit of all trades and fix all deals and remove the grid as soon as a certain amount is reached.
I would like to hear your comments. Maybe someone has tried this variant? Personally it works too perfectly for me, both in flat and in trend, so, now I'm looking for possible negative sides of the method. I cannot find any schemes on the net without them, even if I have been searching for a week.
2. The market touched several orders, then turned around and started collecting orders from the other side. I also fixed a small profit as soon as cumulative profit appeared on all trades, including loss-making ones. And here I have been fixing both pluses and minuses, as a result I got the same profit as in the first case, but there were no dips, then I removed all orders that did not work and removed all the nets and set everything anew
Highlighted is not clear. Where will the total profit come from? Or is there an increase in the volume of the trade? 0.1 0.2 0.3 lots?
This refers to the total balance of all trades in progress. In mt4 it is on the right side under all trades, it shows the total current balance of trades
Thanks Cap, I didn't know, I meant where will the total current balance for all positions come from if the first open ones are more negative than the ones opened later, i.e. after the price turned and started collecting orders from the other side