How to make giant profits on forex? - page 28
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
Well, then you must be some kind of extra-class proger and use special software to do this. I am not a professional programmer, so I use traditional standard tools and techniques. I am a radio engineer by education, and all my life I have been working with circuitry of radio-electronic devices of varying degrees of complexity. I have also had to deal with complicated space systems. I learned BASIC programming in the 1980s when I was a workaholic. At that time I supervised the development of a sophisticated hardware/software complex and had to write the terms of reference for programmers. That's when I learned Basics at the same time).
On the contrary, I'm a very weak coder. That's why it's easier for me to make each idea as a separate EA, rather than create a global monster, which it is not clear how to support in the future.
The main issue that can't be solved by means of MQ is management of the Expert Advisor PORTFOLIO. That is, reallocation of capital, based on current trading AND testing data. How do you do this, cramming all the logics into one test?
On the contrary, I am a very weak coder. That's why it's easier for me to shape each idea into a separate EA, rather than create a global monster which it is not clear how to support in the future.
The main issue that can't be solved by means of MQ is management of the Expert Advisor PORTFOLIO. That is, reallocation of capital, based on current trading AND testing data. How do you do this, cramming all logics into one test?
You need to allocate for each strategy a share of the total deposit in proportion to how much that strategy earns. Suppose some strategy starts to work badly, then accordingly, it should have a smaller share of the total deposit and work with a smaller lot. And vice versa, if some strategy starts bringing more profit, it is assigned a larger share of the total deposit. At present this problem is solved, but not completely, not in a flexible and adaptive way, as I described above. So far I have the following: I equalize maximal drawdown size of all strategies at the expense of the initial lot size during testing. It turns out that all strategies work with different initial lots. But it is certainly not a very good variant, it would be better to regulate the lot size during the working process depending on strategy profit as I described above. But I plan to do it in the future, I haven't had time to do it yet, since I have just recently started doing multi strategies.
Each strategy should be allocated a share of the total deposit in proportion to how much it earns. Let's say some strategy starts to work badly, so it should have a smaller share of the total deposit and work with a smaller lot. And vice versa, if some strategy starts bringing more profit, it should have a larger share of the total deposit. At present this problem is solved, but not completely, not in a flexible and adaptive way, as I described above. So far I have the following: during testing I adjust the maximal drawdown size of all strategies at the expense of the initial lot size. It turns out that all strategies work with different initial lots. But it is certainly not a very good variant, it would be better to regulate the lot size during the working process depending on strategy profit as I described above. But I am planning to do it in the future, I have not had time to do it yet, as I have only recently started doing multi-strategies.
Yellow highlighted: it certainly does not work that way :) Try to test it and you will understand. This is called equity trading, you are proposing to trade the trend.
Green highlighted: This is how it works. But, there are nuances, with an understanding of which you can achieve significant synergies:
-correlation of profits and losses of different EAs (if a group shows simultaneous drawdown, you need to minimize distribution of money to such a group and vice versa)
-different run times of different EAs (if a group of EAs works, for example, only during evening session, and another group only during day session, then they do not overlap)
-Different time in a transaction, and, accordingly, different time of capital holding.
-Liquidity restrictions
-Limitations of liquidity and so on :)
Yellow highlighted: this of course doesn't work :) Try it out and you'll see. This is called equity trading, you are proposing to trade the trend.
Green highlighted: this is exactly how it works. But, there are nuances, with an understanding of which you can achieve significant synergies:
-correlation of profits and losses of different EAs (if a group shows simultaneous drawdown, you need to minimize distribution of money to such a group and vice versa)
-different run times of different EAs (if a group of EAs works, for example, only during evening session, and another group only during day session, then they do not overlap)
-Different time in a transaction, and, accordingly, different time of capital holding.
-Liquidity restrictions
-and so on :)
We have slightly different objectives. You seem to think that my strategies operate independently and in parallel. But they are not. My signals from different strategies work sequentially. The signal that came first provides an entry. All other signals are blocked. After the orders are closed, all the signals are allowed to work. Again, the one that came first blocks the others and provides a new entrance into the market. So on and so forth. Actually, I began to use multi signal first of all to increase the amount of deals I was always short of. This system is good because addition of a new strategy does not increase a deposit load and hence relative drawdown does not increase as well.
We have slightly different objectives. You seem to think that my strategies work independently and in parallel. But they do not. My signals from different strategies work in series. The signal that came first provides entry, all other signals are blocked. After the orders are closed, all the signals are allowed to work. Again, the one that came first blocks the others and provides a new entrance into the market. So on and so forth. Actually, I began to use multi signal first of all to increase the amount of deals I was always short of. This system is good because addition of a new strategy does not increase a deposit load and hence relative drawdown does not increase as well.
Well then it is rather one strategy with variant entry/exit. There is no synergy here, unfortunately.
Well then it's more like one strategy, with variable entry/exit. There is no synergy here, unfortunately.
Why one? All signals are generated by different conditions. Different closing conditions, different parameters.
Yellow highlighted: this of course doesn't work :) Try it out and you'll see. This is called equity trading, you are proposing to trade the trend.
Green highlighted: this is exactly how it works. But, there are nuances, with an understanding of which you can achieve significant synergies:
-correlation of profits and losses of different EAs (if a group shows simultaneous drawdown, you need to minimize distribution of money to such a group and vice versa)
-different run times of different EAs (if a group of EAs works, for example, only during evening session, and another group only during day session, then they do not overlap)
-Different time in a transaction, and, accordingly, different time of capital holding.
-Liquidity restrictions
-and so on :)
Well, why a trend? I have different strategies there, there are also counter-trend strategies. You should also keep in mind that the lot will not change quickly (not as often as trends). You have to accumulate a certain profit from this strategy, which is enough for a minimum lot step. And because the targets in most strategies are small and trades are quite rare, then the growth of the lot to the minimum value will not happen very quickly: maybe once a month, maybe once every 3 months, or even less often, I have not calculated.
Why one? All signals are generated by different conditions. Different closing conditions, different parameters.
It's obvious!
Suppose you have three different strategies A, B and C. We know the parameters of each of them from the tests. Suppose A shows annual average profit of 30% with 10% drawdown, B shows 50% with 10% drawdown, and C shows 90% with 40% drawdown.
You bring them all to the same drawdown and get the distribution of capital (roughly) A=45%, B=45%, C=10%.
If you use these strategies separately, then the calculated profit should be 13.5+22.5+9=45% with incomprehensible maximum drawdown.
And in your case, if all the strategies will run simultaneously in one system, what will be the profit is not clear, what will be the maximum drawdown is not clear, because the results of individual strategies is totally impossible to rely on. We can only rely on the results of testing of the total system. So it is one system :)
As far as I understand, you have martingale, so the specifics of the permanent reservation of a huge part of the deposit has an effect on any ideas related to paralleling. That's understandable.
Firstly, as I wrote in the post above, there is not one strategy, but many.
Secondly, of the indicators used - fractal with no parameters, and wipes with period 5 without any optimisation (used in only one strategy).
Some of the parameters you listed are of course there, but using some technology, which I will not describe here, parameter settings can be made without enumeration of values...
There is clearly a lack of a neural network
work will be performed on the most appropriate one
And also, it may be a bank, or an alienated clearing company or who knows who else. But the bottom line is the same. Provides liquidity, maintains volatility, participates in trading.
how much good is in this offer
keep studying the market and get a strategy which is underlined
strange as it may seem, price can be controlled, just stay out of the kitchens
A kitchen is first and foremost a dumb copy of a cotier.
and you want the price to respond to your every sneeze.
Really, in this case:
- buy and the price goes down;
- sell and the price goes up.
this is the real trading, which teaches you to trade the way almost no one knows how to trade.