A futures trade opens at Last price, not at Bid or Ask. Is this normal? - page 8
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
If it slips, the bid will not be executed, because the limit will go into the cup.
Long we close with a Sell order.
If SellStopLimit is at the worst price and without slippage, the market will bump, and the profit will be smaller by the size of spread. See the screenshot of the market.
If you set SellStopLimit at a better price, then yes, the TP limit will be higher.
But what is the sense in it? After the trigger the price may not reach your limit)
Why would you set the trigger on the TP level, when you can set a regular SellLimit with a guaranteed price on this level?
I meant simple limit orders at TP level. The Buy position is closed by a SellLimit order. SellStopLimit is not obvious. If the stop level is below, it will be executed immediately, but at a worse price. Excessive risks.
I was referring to simple limit orders at TP level. The Buy position is closed by a SellLimit order. SellStopLimit is not obvious.
If the stop level is below, it will be executed immediately, but at a worse price. There are unnecessary risks.
Yes.
To sum it up.
StopLimit is only used to enter a position on the breakout, with slippage control.
Yes.
To summarise, we can summarise.
StopLimit is only used to enter a position on a breakout, with slippage control.
Thanks, useful)
Thank you, helpful)
And about limit TP, think about what you will do if your limit is not fully executed.
For example you have a big position and you want to close TP with one limit for 100 contracts.
For example, you slowly begin to execute your TP, they bite off 5 contracts, 10, 20, and the price reverses. You still have an open position for 65 contracts.
If you want to fix this profit, you may at a certain deviation of price from TP, partially close this position to avoid slippage.
Or you can move the TP limit balance in the hope that it will be executed.
It is generally up to your strategy to close the profitable position.
You can also place an iceberg order with hidden main part, but unfortunately there are no such orders in mt5.
As for limit TP, think about what you will do if your limit is not fully executed.
For example, you have built up a large position and you want to close the TP with one limit of 100 contracts.
For example, you slowly begin to execute your TP, they bite off 5 contracts, 10, 20, and the price reverses. You still have an open position for 65 contracts.
If you want to fix this profit, you may at a certain deviation of price from TP, partially close this position to avoid slippage.
Or you can move the TP limit balance in the hope that it will be executed.
It is generally up to your strategy to close the profitable position.
You can use the iceberg order with hidden main part, but mt5 will not have such orders unfortunately.
Therefore for series analysis MT4 with logic of order, trade operation and hidden order execution is more suitable for me. For real trading MT5 is more transparent, but more difficult to control the order execution. It is more transparent, but more difficult to control the order execution. I am not a proponent of partial closes, averaging and other options such as reducing losses, increasing profits, or reducing risk. I am a follower of simple logics, an entry error is a loss, a correct entry is a profit.
So for row analysis MT4 with the logic of order, trade and hidden order execution is more suitable for me. For real trading MT5 is more transparent, but also more complicated in controlling the execution of orders. It is more transparent, but more difficult to control the order execution. I am not a proponent of partial closes, averaging and other options such as reducing losses, increasing profits, or reducing risk. I support simple logic, an entering error means a loss, but a correct entry means a profit.
Of course, the choice is always up to you. All this was described for exchange execution.
For dealing forex, already your tricks against the dealer, and this is the key problem.
Conflict of interest.
Of course, the choice is always yours. All of this has been described for exchange execution.
For dealing forex, already its own tricks against the dealer and this is the key problem.
Conflict of interest.
So far, other than finite volumes on the exchange and sort of infinite volumes on forex and the difference in order execution in case of lack of volume on order execution, I don't see a difference. The accounting of volumes on the exchange is mandatory, which is not obvious for Forex. Accordingly, the logic of the algorithms is different.
So far, other than finite volumes on the exchange and sort of infinite volumes on the forex and the difference in order execution in case of lack of volume on order execution, I don't see a difference. The accounting of volumes on the exchange is mandatory, which is not obvious for Forex. Accordingly, the logic of the algorithms is different.
You simply trade dealing forex, not the spot market with first-level liquidity.
That is why you do not see anything. The dealer has hidden everything from you and established his own rules)
. The spot market also has a market depth and liquidity.
You are just trading a dealing forex market, not a spot market with tier one liquidity.
That's why you don't see anything. The dealer hid everything from you and set his own rules ))
On the spot market, there is also a glass, volumes with liquidity.
With the liquidity of the first level you have to work))) The requirements for an IPO are of course strict, but they still do not guarantee a zero share price.)
You have to work with Tier 1 liquidity))) The requirements for an IPO are of course strict, but they still do not guarantee zero prices for shares.)
You misunderstand.
In the spot forex market, there is also liquidity.
This liquidity is provided by the leading banks and liquidity aggregators.
Exchange-traded shares have nothing to do with it. The exchange industry is already transparent, not counting hidden dark pools.
As for the bankruptcy of the company and its delisting from the stock exchange, of course there is a risk in that. But that is if you are a holder of a large block of shares for dividends.
For trading, I think there is no reason to be afraid of it. But it is of course necessary to keep track of the company if you trade a certain set of shares.
And for that you need to be able to read the company's quarterly, annual reports. Analyse debit, credit, etc.
Fundamental analysis is complicated, I agree, not everyone can understand it.
That's why average average people go back and forth on the eurik, through dealing, with other risks, conflict of interest.)