[Archive] Learn how to make money villagers! - page 405
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
Yes, there must be enough depo to cover the margin and drawdown. This is the only way to survive!
Combine all the villagers' depots into one, then divide the profits as a percentage )))
Villagers, a suggestion!
So work with Osma entry (safer) or just enter and average. EA parameters should be set to withstand a minimum of 350 pips of no return. I.e. 17 bends step=20 (mine is). And then the following: The 18th knee (buy) opens with increasing lots for Exp and is immediately locked with the same volume of sell position, the 19th knee (sell) is also locked with volumes of sell position.
Bottom line: the price cannot go up forever, we will close the bed anyway, as at the opening of the new knees the take level will move. We close the entire set and do not look at plus or minus. Our advantage: the robot gains profit from the set. Our disadvantage is spreads and commissions. We have two variants. The first one, the profit from the series has covered the cost of spreads or commissions; the second one, it hasn't and we have suffered a little. You have got caught, but you have closed the set that has prevented you from sleeping :-) I had such cases. But we are in the market, we are cutting :-).
Brought to everyone's attention. I would also like to upgrade the system.
Yes, the deposit should be sufficient for the margin and the drawdown. That is the only way to survive!
Villagers, a suggestion!
So work with Osma entry (safer) or just enter and average. EA parameters should be set to withstand a minimum of 350 pips of no return. I.e. 17 bends step=20 (mine is). And then the following: The 18th knee (buy) opens with increasing lots for Exp and is immediately locked with the same volume of sell position, the 19th knee (sell) is also locked with volumes of sell position.
Bottom line: the price cannot go up forever, we will close the bed anyway, as at the opening of the new knees the take level will move. We close the entire set and do not look at plus or minus. Our advantage: the robot gains profit from the set. Our disadvantage is spreads and commissions. We have two variants. The first one, the profit from the series has covered the cost of spreads or commissions; the second one, it hasn't and we have suffered a little. You have got caught, but you have closed the set that has prevented you from sleeping :-) I had such cases. But we are in the market, we are cutting :-).
Brought to everyone's attention. I would also like to upgrade the system.
Yes, the deposit should be sufficient for the margin and the drawdown. That is the only way to survive!
We will close the bed, but there will be one or two dangerous sells of gigantic volume and with the same cumulative minus. Then what to do with them?) So far we have "saved" only the balance, the funds all also do not know sleep)
Yep, the topic has gone off the title page, so people have agreed on something!
Have the villagers learned how to make money or what?
Learning :)))
We will close the garden, but we will be left with one or two dangerous sells of huge volume and with the same total minus. Then what to do with them?) So far we have "saved" only the balance, the funds all also do not know sleep)
Why not? We'll close the set with all the trades. Minus the spread, plus earnings from averaging. Why should there be one or two large sells? Let's close all of them. Suppose we have a net of orders with the volume of 0.5 lots, and then we lock the new "knees". At the same time, the take is constantly being pulled up. When the take is touched, all trades are closed. Mathematically, everything is so. Of course, there should be enough funds for one more move against us.
I'm waiting for your criticism.
Why not? We'll close the set with all the trades. Minus the spread, plus earnings from averaging. Why should there be one or two large sells? Let's close all of them. Suppose we have a net of orders with the volume of 0.5 lots, and then we lock the new "knees". At the same time, the take is constantly being pulled up. When the take is touched, all trades are closed. Mathematically, everything is so.
I am waiting for a criticism.
The point is that if we start locking new positions from the n-th step, we do nothing! After all, we are essentially opening all new lots.
We may as well just stop trading and even save on spreads of new positions. At the same time lots on an unblocked pack continue to grow as we move down.
That is why the take level for profit exit has remained there, far above, and has not been pulled up for a long time since we started breaking even (or stopped averaging).
And that means that if we close at the pulled up take, we will fix a minus, because it was still a long way to a real plus take)
Why not? We'll close the set with all the trades. Minus the spread, plus earnings from averaging. Why should there be one or two large sells? Let's close all of them. Suppose we have a net of orders with the volume of 0.5 lots, and then we lock the new "knees". At the same time, the take is constantly being pulled up. When the take is touched, all trades are closed. Mathematically, everything is so.
I am waiting for your criticism.
There is no sense to open more bays and sells, the situation essentially comes down to a simple locking of buy orders, in part or in full,
and then it's better to work with one lock order. I suggest a slightly different approach to deal with it. If the price goes down,
then we start partial closing of Avalanche orders, and if the price reverses in our direction, then we close the bed for no profit.