Making money on forex is impossible - page 17
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
He has already helped many people and was perfectly understood the first time. How many understood you? ;)
I haven't asked myself that question.
What can I say... One and the same idea may be clear and understandable to some, and completely unclear and incomprehensible to others. Learn to pick out the essence. That will definitely help you. And then, you may be able to help others, maybe... if those others see point 1.
OK. Let's learn to express ourselves. Would you be so kind and generous with your mathematics and use a simple example to explain what you mean by the concept ofabsolute break-even
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/152696/page11#984300
Here is an extract
....I have said it a hundred times before, but I must say it again: I have set myself the goal of achievingabsolute break-even. I am sure that many people do not even understand the complexity of this task.
I dare to suggest two possibilities.
1. the TS does not make loss-making trades.... , from the banal averaging and loss sitting, to hedging or building so-called delta-neutral strategies.
2. TS possessing ABSOLUTE breakeven, whenever you close a deal you are always in the plus, ie, as I said above, once you have entered the transaction price is moving only in your direction, not a single tick against you.
Example. You entered at 1.3400... You closed at 1.3450, earned +50, but the price descended to 1.3350, that is, at that moment you had not fixed loss -50 (drawdown).
S.I. If you look at the result only at the close of the trade, everything is good +50. Is this the kind of system that is a super challenge for you ?
Okay. Let's learn how to express ourselves. Kindly and kindly explain to me, using mathematics and a simple example, what you mean by your above-mentioned concept ofbreak-even point.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/152696/page11#984300
Here is an extract
I dare to suggest two options.
1. the TS does not make losing trades.... options of realizations of the sea, from the banal averaging and over sitting losses, to hedging or building so-called delta-neutral strategies.
2. TS possessing ABSOLUTE breakeven, whenever you close a deal you are always in the plus, ie, as I said above, once you have entered the transaction price is moving only in your direction, not a single tick against you.
Example. You entered at 1.3400... You closed at 1.3450, earned +50, but the price descended to 1.3350, that is, at that moment you had not fixed loss -50 (drawdown).
S.I. If you look at the result only at the close of the trade, everything is good +50. Is this the kind of system that is a super challenge for you ?
Don't be so twisted...
The main objective is to optimize the cache/ balance ratio. Sub-objective 1 -- maximize balance growth. The subordinate task 2 -- minimize the number of losing trades.
I have repeatedly mentioned this hierarchy of tasks. And there is no need to explain it all here for the tenth time, it is in my branch.
So, about break-even, we are speaking about task 2 where the minimum is reached at N=0.
Do you see what I'm talking about?
I have said it a hundred times before, but I must say it again: I have set myself the task of achieving absolute break-even. I am sure that many people do not even understand the complexity of such a task.I am sure that many people don't even understand the complexity of such a task. At the same time,it is constantly being improved.
The conditions for achieving the result, once figured out, can derail motivation.
A completed task is a good thing by the very fact of completion. And as a rule, this fact of solving another task opens up new tasks that are no less interesting.
Don't be so twisted...
The main objective is to optimise the cache/balance sheet ratio. Subordinate task 1 - maximization of balance growth. Subordinate task 2 -- minimizing the number of losing trades.
I have repeatedly mentioned this hierarchy of tasks. And there is no need to explain it all for the tenth time, it is in my branch.
So, about break-even, we are speaking about task 2 where the minimum is reached at N=0.
Do you understand what I'm talking about?
Breakeven is bullshit. Work on breakeven.
No, why give away secrets?
Breakeven is bullshit. Work on breakeven.
I don't agree with the first statement. And the second is absolutely correct, it needs to be worked on more thoroughly.
I don't agree with the first statement. And the second is absolutely correct, it needs to be worked on more thoroughly.