Something that really pisses me off on MT4

New comment
 

Yes, this thing really pisses me off and I really WOULD LIKE NOT TO SEE IT ON MT5.

It's about MODE_STOPLEVEL's application. I understand that TP/SL have to be farther from current market, beyond the stoplevel.

BUT I CAN'T LAUNCH PENDING ORDER, THAT HAS NO TP OR SL, BECAUSE ITS PRICE IS TOO NEAR CURRENT MARKET.

Anybody agrees this sucks big time?

 
TheEconomist:

Anybody agrees this sucks big time?

Surely that's a broker-driven issue, rather than something which Metaquotes can "fix" in MT5? May be partially related to the absence of partial fills in MT4.

 
I think this restriction is something extra. Error 130 is called "Invalid stops"... There should have been an error "Invalid pending price opening". This shows that the original intent of MODE_STOPLEVEL was to be applied to SLs/TPs, not opening prices. After all, if this behaviour wouldn't have been previously coded in MT, brokers couldn't impose it.
 
TheEconomist:
I think this restriction is something extra. Error 130 is called "Invalid stops"... There should have been an error "Invalid pending price opening". This shows that the original intent of MODE_STOPLEVEL was to be applied to SLs/TPs, not opening prices. After all, if this behaviour wouldn't have been previously coded in MT, brokers couldn't impose it.

There will be some pure technological issues involved, but there's presumably nothing to stop brokers halving MODE_STOPLEVEL on a particular symbol, or even reducing it to zero. I assume the setting exists because the brokers want it to exist, and they'd be much more reluctant to support MT4/MT5 if it didn't exist. Your comment "...brokers couldn't impose it" isn't how I see the relationship between brokers and Metaquotes working. We're not the paying customers of Metaquotes. The brokers are.

 
Yes, the setting exist because the brokers want it to exist. EA is simply automation as you already know, and it can't break any trading limitation ruled by the broker. You can't do it on the manual trading, so you can't do it using the EA. And "Invalid stops" simply means there's a violation to the stoplevel rule, whether it's stop loss, take profit or pending order. I think it's not a big deal, for me at least.
 

Pick a broker/dealer that does not implement this "feature", or has a minimal setting

PFGBest - 1

MBTrading - 0 (if they ever go live)

FXCM - 0

 
phy:

Pick a broker/dealer that does not implement this "feature", or has a minimal setting

[...]

FXCM - 0

I'm aware - as BB keeps telling us - that we're not allowed to talk about brokers, but the position isn't quite this simple. At many times of day, including right now (midnight UTC), the downside to FXCM's zero stop-level is that the spread is wider than on other brokers. There's a price for having MODE_STOPLEVEL = 0. It may indeed ultimately be beneficial, but it's not simply a case of comparing MODE_STOPLEVEL between brokers.

 
phy:

Pick a broker/dealer that does not implement this "feature", or has a minimal setting

PFGBest - 1

MBTrading - 0 (if they ever go live)

FXCM - 0

Cool, at least I can backtest...

New comment
Reason: