signal - volume size is only 0.01 but my account bigger than oryginal

 

Original signal is 500PLN 1:400, my account is 5000PLN and 1:500. The source account has position 0.02 but it opens it at my computer at 0.01. I have set margin at 95% of my account.

I tried different providers all require much bigger account than source account. What am i doing wrong? How do i make this signal work right? is the only way to really invest that much?


here is the signal:

https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/6685#!tab=trading

 
angreeee:

Original signal is 500PLN 1:400, my account is 5000PLN and 1:500. The source account has position 0.02 but it opens it at my computer at 0.01. I have set margin at 95% of my account.

I tried different providers all require much bigger account than source account. What am i doing wrong? How do i make this signal work right? is the only way to really invest that much?


here is the signal:

https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/6685#!tab=trading

The balance of the provider is 7448PLN, not 500.
 
angevoyageur:
The balance of the provider is 7448PLN, not 500.

yes but it was originally 500. And it does not need the entire 7500 for safety margin looking at the chart. (ture - 500 would could be enough, too big DDs)  the 5k account whould be more than enough and cutting all to 0.01 decreases profitability a lot

I have exceptional math and programming skill and thy the program blocks me from doing the right thing? Why cannot I increase lot size on my own risk when i did the math?

It seens i will have to purchase these positions by hand when he does so :/.
 
angevoyageur:
The balance of the provider is 7448PLN, not 500.

Fact - i need only about 2.5k not 7.5k to be relatively safe. Or even if I WONT be safe i SHOULD have an option to make the stupid decision on my own.

ok from a logical point of view it should be possible, but only for users that claim they are "advanced users". It would be moronic and  gonverment-style not to leave any choice.

Where do i find an option to override safety limits?

 

i guess there is no i just tortured google.

But really i was thinking before what effect it is having if it is not posible to do that. My conclusion is:

The result of carrying about "safety" of the people is decreasing profitability and increasing looses when people do not have enough money. (so for poor people)

So poor and smart people get worse conditions than stupid people that can afford full account size.

How that increases the safety of an account idk.


And this all "let me care about your safety, you are too dumm to do it yourself, thats why im not letting you really choose for yourself, do you want that protection or not. Im smarter than you and ive choosen for ya" gonverment-style attitude is making me puke.

Why all these **** regulations? where is the free market? if somebody is dumb and would lose his money if not for the protection maybe should not be benefitted only because he has the right ACCOUNT SIZE. I think more benefitted should be a person

that think is able to assess the risk by himself but does not have sufficient amount of money to use the EA at it full capacity.


Its like this whole economy. Its telling it i keeping you safe. What is really doing is reducing your profit.

 

Tip for EA providers how to bypass this stupid option:

when u open first order at lets say 0.1 lot and second 0.2 lot the guy with small account get only 0.01 for both. So what you can do is to open first order normally but the second one instead of opening 1 position 2x bigger open 2 positions the same size the first at this price.

(multiply the number of orders not value of lots)

That way all your clients are going to get at least the right proportions. If anyone has a client-side way to bypass this stupid settings please let me know. Thanks.

Documentation on MQL5: Trade Functions / OrdersTotal
Documentation on MQL5: Trade Functions / OrdersTotal
  • www.mql5.com
Trade Functions / OrdersTotal - Documentation on MQL5
 

You should have the option to specify matching the provider's lot_size exactly.

This shouldn't be a default option and should come with a warning when subscribers choose this option. Because a demo-provider could kill his subscribers real-account with one accidental large lot_size. Or small account subscriber could get hit with killer lot_size should he not_realize how things works on his first trade. If a provider makes deposits and changes lot_sizes this could break someone who taught he knew what he was doing.

Given these risks, it's understandable why the % structure is currently being used.

 
angreeee:

Tip for EA providers how to bypass this stupid option:

when u open first order at lets say 0.1 lot and second 0.2 lot the guy with small account get only 0.01 for both. So what you can do is to open first order normally but the second one instead of opening 1 position 2x bigger open 2 positions the same size the first at this price.

(multiply the number of orders not value of lots)

That way all your clients are going to get at least the right proportions. If anyone has a client-side way to bypass this stupid settings please let me know. Thanks.

You can subscribe to the signal using a demo account with a big balance and set the % rate so you get a 1:1 copy (or whatever ratio you want).  Then use a trade duplicating software to copy across to your real account.  The drawback is there is an extra delay so there can be more slippage and also it could break altogether leaving your real account with unattended trades open.  A lot can go wrong.  Do this entirely at your own risk.  If the signal provider makes a large withdrawal you're screwed - because it will change the copy ratio of your demo account and you will suddenly be trading much larger lot sizes.

I think the problem is not the position sizing algorithm of the signal service, but rather with signal providers who do not understand how it works.

You make a very good point about signals with varying lot size for money management.  Unles the subscriber has a copy ratio of exactly 100% or 200% or 300% etc.  then it will not work.  If the provider opens multiple trades of the same size instead, then it works fine.

 
xorpheus:

You can subscribe to the signal using a demo account with a big balance and set the % rate so you get a 1:1 copy (or whatever ratio you want).  Then use a trade duplicating software to copy across to your real account.  The drawback is there is an extra delay so there can be more slippage and also it could break altogether leaving your real account with unattended trades open.  A lot can go wrong.  Do this entirely at your own risk.  If the signal provider makes a large withdrawal you're screwed - because it will change the copy ratio of your demo account and you will suddenly be trading much larger lot sizes.

I think the problem is not the position sizing algorithm of the signal service, but rather with signal providers who do not understand how it works.

You make a very good point about signals with varying lot size for money management.  Unles the subscriber has a copy ratio of exactly 100% or 200% or 300% etc.  then it will not work.  If the provider opens multiple trades of the same size instead, then it works fine.

You should not suggest such things otherwise you may be encouraging the breaking of the Rules of Using the Signals Service

From here: https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/rules

 

"IV 14. It is not allowed to set up a new Signal based on the trading account that is subscribed to another Signal. Resale or free retransmission of Trading Signals is prohibited.

Rules of Using the Signals Service
Rules of Using the Signals Service
  • www.mql5.com
Terms of Service MQL5 Trading Signals: Signal Providers, how to create a signal subscription signals.
 
RaptorUK:

You should not suggest such things otherwise you may be encouraging the breaking of the Rules of Using the Signals Service

From here: https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/rules

 

"IV 14. It is not allowed to set up a new Signal based on the trading account that is subscribed to another Signal. Resale or free retransmission of Trading Signals is prohibited.

Sorry.  Doing that never even crossed my mind!  It's just a way of getting around a frustrating problem.

 
xorpheus:

Sorry.  Doing that never even crossed my mind!  It's just a way of getting around a frustrating problem.

If you do what you suggested then you are effectively retransmitting the signal, that is clearly not allowed.
Reason: