MT5 a step backwards?? - page 7

New comment
 

I'm arrived to be tired of MQ4, too many trick to obtain decent programs and too many trick for decent backtesting.
So I've to decide if left the Metaquotes world due to the limitations in MT5 and go to study new opportunities.
Some US broker have begin to offer their new platforms, this surely to the bad feedback of traders about MT5.
Someone know what has decided Metaquotes about the single position "forced feature" of MQL5 ?
Will be present only for NFA broker, or it will be extended to all forex brokers?

 
I think if it's MT5, it is single position forced feature. MT5 has not been accepted by many traders. Metaquotes has said they will continue to support MT4 ..MT4 is paying their electric bill and salary LOL. MT5 is only costing them money and chasing people away to as you mention other platforms. Don't worry about NFA everyone I know has closed their NFA broker regulated accounts.
 

And that is exactly what I hate about MT5.

They provide unecessary features in MT5 at the expense of MT4 die hards.


This is my perspective about hedging:

HEDGE:

1) BUY 1 LOT of EURUSD @ 1.2000 ( PAY 5 pips spread)

2) SELL 1 LOT of EURUSD @ 1.3000 (PAY 5 pips spread)

3) TAKE PROFIT on SELL @ 1.2000 (1000 pips profit)

4) TAKE PROFIT on BUY @ 1.5000 (2000 pips profit)

SUMMARY: You get 3000 pip profits with lost of just 10 pips


NON-HEDGE:

1) BUY 1 LOT of EURUSD @ 1.2000 (PAY 5 pips spread)

2) TAKEPROFIT on BUY @ 1.3000 (1000 pips profit) * This must occur because hedging is not allow.

3) SELL 1 LOT of EURUSD @1.3000 (PAY 5 pips spread)

4) TAKEPROFIT on SELL @ 1.2000 (1000 pips profit)

SUMMARY: You get ONLY 2000 pips profit with lost of 10 pips. If you want to takeprofit @ 1.5000 from a long position,

you need to make a third trade and thus pay a third spread!

 
ckingher:

SUMMARY: You get ONLY 2000 pips with lost of 10 pips. [...]

...Because your examples aren't equivalent.

The equivalent of the first example in a non-hedging scenario is 3) open a buy at 1.2000 and 4) close it at 1.5000. In the first, hedged part of the example the net position is as follows:

1) Long 1 lot at 1.2000
2) No net position, at 1.3000 (long 1 lot, short 1 lot)
3) Long 1 lot at 1.2000 (sell closed, leaving 1 lot long)
4) No net position, at 1.5000 (buy closed)

And, BTW, the profit on the buy order in the first half of your example is 3000 pips, not 2000 pips (1.5000 - 1.2000), for a total of 4000, not 3000.

 
jjc:

...Because your examples aren't equivalent.

The equivalent of the first example in a non-hedging scenario is 3) open a buy at 1.2000 and 4) close it at 1.5000. In the first, hedged part of the example the net position is as follows:

1) Long 1 lot at 1.2000
2) No net position, at 1.3000 (long 1 lot, short 1 lot)
3) Long 1 lot at 1.2000 (sell closed, leaving 1 lot long)
4) No net position, at 1.5000 (buy closed)

And, BTW, the profit on the buy order in the first half of your example is 3000 pips, not 2000 pips (1.5000 - 1.2000).


yes, because hedging and non-hedging are not equivalent. Did you read my summary? If you want equivalence, you need to make a third position and pay a third spread!!!!!
 
ckingher:

yes, because hedging and non-hedging are not equivalent. Did you read my summary? If you want equivalence, you need to make a third position and pay a third spread!!!!!
No, you don't. The non-hedged equivalent of your hedged example involves only two orders: a buy opened at 1.2000 and closed at 1.3000, and another buy opened at 1.2000 and closed at 1.5000. That gives the same net position throughout in a non-hedged environment as the net position in your hedged example.
 

You cannot buy at 1.2000 and closed at 1.5000 because hedging is not allowed.

Thus you have to close your LONG at 1.3000 to make a SHORT at 1.3000 and takeprofit on the short 1.2000.

Thus non-hedging and hedging are not equivalent, you will have to pay a third spread with non-hedging.

 
ckingher:

You cannot buy at 1.2000 and closed at 1.5000 because hedging is not allowed.

Thus you have to close your LONG at 1.3000 to make a SHORT at 1.3000 and takeprofit on the short 1.2000.

Thus non-hedging and hedging are not equivalent, you will have to pay a third spread.

Again, no. In your hedged example the net position is never short. The system starts 1 lot long, goes flat, and then goes long again. I'll repeat your own example to you again:

1) Buy at 1.2000. System is 1 lot long.
2) Sell at 1.3000. System is flat (1 lot long and 1 lot short).
3) Close sell at 1.2000. System is 1 lot long.
4) Close buy at 1.5000. System is flat.

Therefore, the non-hedged equivalent consists of two buy orders, not overlapping in time.

 

HEDGING is best because it requires less trades thus minimizing spreads you lose to the broker and minimizing overtrading.

We all know that the more trades you make, the less chance of success.

Therefore, why trade with three trades when you can do with just two trades?

 
ckingher:

HEDGING is best because it requires less trades thus minimizing spreads you lose to the broker and minimizing overtrading.

We all know that the more trades you make, the less chance of success.

Therefore, why trade with three trades when you can do with just two trades?

I've just demonstrated to you that the non-hedged equivalent only involves two orders.
1234567891011121314
New comment
Reason: