MT5 a step backwards?? - page 8

New comment
 
jjc:

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.


It is not flat because you recognized the retracement and made a SHORT at step 2. And thus profit at step 3.

And then the pairs goes back to normal all the way to 1.5000. And thus you take profit at 4.

How can you be flat??????

 
ckingher:


It is not flat because you recognized the retracement and made a SHORT at step 2. And thus profit at step 3.

And then the pairs goes back to normal all the way to 1.5000. And thus you take profit at 4.

How can you be flat??????

Your net position is flat at stage 2 because you opened a buy order at stage 1 and have now opened a sell order at stage 2. You are long 1 lot and short 1 lot. You have no net position, and your account equity and balance are locked apart from (a) changes in the spread, and (b) differential in the long/short swap.

In the first, hedged part of your example, the net position remains flat until stage 3. At that point the sell is closed, moving you to 1 lot long again.

Going back to your original post, your hedged and non-hedged examples are completely different. They are not alternative versions of each other.

 
jjc:
I've just demonstrated to you that the non-hedged equivalent only involves two orders.

You did not demonstrate or illustrate anything?? Where is your example?????
 
ckingher:

You did not demonstrate or illustrate anything?? Where is your example?????
I've gone step by step through your own hedged example, showing you the net position at each stage, and therefore the equivalent non-hedged orders.
 
jjc:

Your net position is flat at stage 2 because you opened a buy order at stage 1 and have now opened a sell order at stage 2. You are long 1 lot and short 1 lot. You have no net position, and your account equity and balance are locked apart from (a) changes in the spread, and (b) differential in the long/short swap.

In the first, hedged part of your example, the net position remains flat until stage 3. At that point the sell is closed, moving you to 1 lot long again.


If you don't know what you are doing and don't recognize a retracement, then it may look flat to you. Too bad, you don't understand that hedging allows us to

HOLD ORIGINAL POSITION, TRADE A RETRACEMENT, and ULTIMATELY make profits on both the TRENDING trade and the RETRACEMENT trade.

 

AGAIN, you need to listen and understand:

If you don't know what you are doing and don't recognize a retracement, then it may look flat to you. Too bad, you don't understand that hedging allows us to

HOLD ORIGINAL POSITION, TRADE A RETRACEMENT, and ULTIMATELY make profits on both the TRENDING trade and the RETRACEMENT trade.



NOTE: Why would you close your original position when you know the trend will continue??? In NON-HEDGING, you cannot hold your positions. Thus you will

have to make a third trade paying a third spread!!!!

 
ckingher:


If you don't know what you are doing and don't recognize a retracement, then it may look flat to you. Too bad, you don't understand that hedging allows us to

HOLD ORIGINAL POSITION, TRADE A RETRACEMENT, and ULTIMATELY make profits on both the TRENDING trade and the RETRACEMENT trade.

You're confusing intentions versus current position in the market as perceived by the system or broker. At stage 2 in your example, you consider yourself to be running two different positions. That's fine. But you have no net position in the market, and therefore you can achieve the same effect in the market in a non-hedged environment by using only two buy orders. You can still trade the same strategies, with the same net position in the market etc. You just need to place a different sequence of orders, but leading to the same net position.
 

Okay, give me a NONHEDGE example that is equivalent to HOLDING my TREND POSITION, TRADING a RETRACEMENT, and then profiting both the trend trade and retracement trade.

Additionally, I don't care about NET POSITIONS.

ALL I CARE ABOUT is PROFITS with minimized spreads!

 
ckingher:

NOTE: Why would you close your original position when you know the trend will continue???

In your original hedged example, your position is closed at stage 2. You have no net position in the market. You are 1 lot long and 1 lot short. But, privately, you are treating this as consisting of two separate positions. You can continue to do that in a non-hedged environment. You just need to structure the orders differently - and write your EA differently.
 
ckingher:

Okay, give me a NONHEDGE example that is equivalent to HOLDING my TREND POSITION, TRADING a RETRACEMENT, and then profiting both the trend trade and retracement trade.

I've already given you the equivalent orders in a non-hedged environment which lead to the same financial outcome as your hedged example.
1234567891011121314
New comment