Practice testing, reflection, discussion... - page 12
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
"... increases by 6%..." it is not the loss, but the probability of SL triggering...
once again, the spread is taken at the time of trade opening, i.e. the loss is 32 pips and the profit 28 pips, and this at slp=tp
What's the spread!!!
I put stops at the same distance from each other. I always have the same profit/loss in pips after a trade is closed.
The spread only reduces the probability of winning...
The spread will increase the loss of a losing trade and decrease the profit of a profitable one. The difference is 2 spreads.
Or, if you want exactly the same loss/profit on differently directed trades, then the losing trade will be closed first, and the profitable one will not reach it. Either you will have to wait until it reaches it and if it does, or close it at "plan minus two spreads" (thus, the loss will be -30, and the profit 26). And if you wait for the profitable one to reach the desired profit, you will be disappointed at 50% - it will not reach and will also close on the stop.
Point.
Once again, the spread is taken at trade opening, i.e. the loss is 32 pips and the profit 28 pips, and this at sl=tp
.
The loss is taken as many pips as you have planned when you set the loss. If I set it at a distance of 30 pips from the opening price, I will make a loss. at 30 pips.. (!)
Another thing is that the price is 4 pips closer to my loss than to my profit. So it affects ONLY the probability.
The spread will increase the loss of a losing trade and decrease the profit of a profitable one. The difference is 2 spreads.
Or, if you want exactly the same loss/profit on differently directed trades, then the losing trade will be closed first, while the profitable one will not reach it. Either you will have to wait for it to catch up, and if it does, or close it at the value of "plan minus two spreads" (so the loss will be -30, and the profit 26). And if you wait for the profitable one to reach the desired profit, you will be disappointed at 50% - it will not reach and will also close on the stop.
Point.
I plan to wait... and see how many percent of mirror trades don't work out... Just for the sake of interest... just PRACTICALLY...
The loss is as many pips as you planned when you set the loss. If I set it 30 pips away from the opening price, I will make a loss. at 30 pips.. (!)
Another thing is that the price is 4 pips closer to my loss than to my profit. That's how it affects ONLY the probability.
Well then no problem, everything should drain clearly. )
Well then, no problem, everything should merge clearly. )
It should be,... if it weren't for the fluctuating statistics of transaction outcomes...
I plan to wait... and see how many percent of mirror trades don't work out... Just for the sake of interest... just PRACTICALLY...
I see. It doesn't have to be tested in practice either. You can roughly calculate.
If the price needs to go 4 pips to the TP and 58 pips to the SL, the probability counts. I forget the formula, but it will be around 97%. If you add + and - you get -.
In general, I wonder how seriously one can talk about the impact of the spread on the statistics of the outcomes of trades with EQUAL stops (SL=TP)...?
After all, the price does not always bounce back the instant you open the position. It almost always bounces back that is equal to or larger than the spread,... and so, we can say that the position opened exactly halfway between the stops. That is, at this point, the probability of price reaching either of them is equal (I'm not talking about the random nature of quotes here. I'm only talking about statistics)...
I see. It doesn't have to be tested in practice either. You can roughly calculate it.
If the price needs to go 4 pips to the TP and 58 pips to the SL, the probability counts. I forget the formula, but it will be around 97%. If you add + and - you get -.
I notice with interest that the statistics of real trades differ from the calculated values with surprising persistence... and only in the direction of losses. Therefore, I want to see this point PRACTICE as well... :-)
... IN PRACTICE... :-)
Will you also double-check deaths due to a fall from 20 floors?