Damned Martin - page 4
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
You're talking about a different style of trading. We're talking about the dreaded martingale here.
If you do not use tehanalysis when entering, it is better to enter using 2 stop orders. After one of them triggers, delete the second one. Otherwise, it turns out that the minus of the hanging losing position with the initial lot outweighs the series of Take Profits obtained by the order which has hit the favorable price direction. And what is the sense of this series of tekprofits? It turns out that we do not get profit at all at the initial lot. We obtain profit only when orders with a larger lot are opened. And when entering the market using a pair of orders, we will obtain a series of takeprofits for the initial lot already.
On the contrary. Remember Ilan. Loss positions are closed as soon as the total profit is equal to TP. Remember the balance lines on the bars, they are flat. All deals, bai or sells are closed essentially on the TP. I.e., if price goes up without a break up by 100 points, TP is 20, we obtain five bars in a row with one initial lot each. And losing sets, as soon as the next knee in them covers the first one, they are also closed in profit equal to TP. These are standard monkey rules.
Then please explain the standard scheme in this scenario
take the Eurodollar step 200
1.07000 buy
1.07200 lot x2
1.07400 lot x4
1.07600 lot x8
1.07650 peak and go down.
I have been testing the monkeys, almost always the moment of the loss looks like this
if in the case of minus, there is not enough deposit for the next step.
On the contrary. Remember Ilan. Loss positions are closed as soon as the total profit is equal to the TP. Remember the balance lines on the bars, they are flat. All deals, bai or sells are closed essentially on the TP. I.e., if price goes up without a break up by 100 points, TP is 20, we obtain five bars in a row with one initial lot each. And losing sets, as soon as the next knee in them covers the first one, they are also closed in profit equal to TP. These are standard marmoset rules.
If I were to do something like that, I certainly wouldn't use mash-ups. It's all on the surface here, after all, there's the word "bounce back":
1. You write a bounce indicator. For a bounce indicator, for example, the extremum indicator of the day is written first. The pullback indicator works from the first extremum found;
2. No averaging, it is the pullback that is counted in points. 3;
3. If we see "failsafe" movement in the indicator, we will definitely wait for the pullback greater than that shown by the indicator (the indicator above the candlestick hya for a downward movement and below the candlestick lots for an upward one);
4... (keep imagining)
The problem so far seems to be that "after TakeProfit triggers, we open towards the closed profitable position. Thus, the drawdown is increasing:
Step 1: we open BUY and SELL positions simultaneously. Let's assume the price goes down. As a result, TakeProfit for the SELL position is triggered, which means we open a new SELL position. At the end of step 1 we have: a BUY position with a loss and a new SELL position.
There are two further possible outcomes in step 2: the price continues to go down, or the price turns around and goes up. The result is the same - we have a larger drawdown than at the end of step 1.
The problem so far seems to be that "after TakeProfit triggers, we open towards the closed profitable position. Thus, the drawdown is increasing:
Step 1: we open BUY and SELL positions simultaneously. Let's assume the price goes down. As a result, TakeProfit for the SELL position is triggered, which means we open a new SELL position. At the end of step 1 we have: a BUY position with a loss and a new SELL position.
There are two further possible outcomes in step 2: the price continues to go down, or the price turns around and goes up. The result is the same - we have a larger drawdown than at the end of step 1.
Which is to be expected - negative lock grows ahead of balance growth. Without StopLoss nothing good will come of it.
Stop Loss is not interesting. I am thinking to try placing pending orders (or Limit or Stop - we need to see) for half the distance to TakeProfit. In general, to introduce one more element.
Added: stopped on Stop orders:
Vladimir, that's right! Exactly. Nothing special, "always in the market". Yes, two oppositely directed positions are opened, the one that closes at take - opens again (i.e. in the same direction), and the one that has gone into deficit, waits for the next order to open in its direction, but with a larger lot and ONLY under the following conditions:
1. Till they cross. As soon as they cross, the next order is immediately opened, with an increased lot (kof. 1.6 as a default)
2. If the distance from the open minus order to the price is more than 20 points (the averaging ones do not open by a hundred pieces, when the price is flat, they cross back and forth, on the distance close to the minus order)
Added: something broken logic - "... and the one that went into deficit, waiting for the next order to open in its direction, but with a larger lot and ONLY under the following conditions: ...". How we can give it, if we have the only rule for opening: if a position is closed by TakeProfit, it means we will open the same order again.
Based on this, the position will be losing as long as it does NOT have TakeProfit.
Added: something broken logic - "... and the one that went into deficit, waiting for the next order to open in its direction, but with a larger lot and ONLY under the following conditions: ...". How we can give it, if we have the only rule for opening: if a position is closed by TakeProfit, it means we will open the same order again.
Therefore the position will be unprofitable as long as TakeProfit is NOT working.
It will go negative until the averaging orders (on a pullback) bring the series to the plus (profit total). As with all margos. There is nothing complicated about it. The total profit should be equal to the TP (according to the classics). For example, buy 0.01 lot is equal to -100 points (let's say), the trades cross, correction starts, flat, the next 0.02 lot average buy is opened. The price goes up by 40 points. We have a situation, when a 0.01 lot position is -60 pips, and a 0.02 lot position is +40 pips. 1 pip = 1 cent. Total: (-60)+80=20. Closing on total profit equal to TP.
But WHEN to open the next knee? This will be told when the MA 5 crosses back against the trend (when the MA 5 crosses MA 20 downwards, if losing seals, and upwards - if losing buys).