
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
Thanks for the kind words. We're all in this endeavor together. 1% of us would be wealthy, 4% would make slightly better than our careers offer. And the rest 95% would lose whatever they invest. For those who believe in statistics to the core, this piece of statistic should send the message home.
I started coding may 2010. Within the first week, I created an EA with Profit-f of 1.30. Then I taught give me 3-weeks and I'll have a system with pf of 5%. It toke me 3-months to Break the 1.30 Barrier (with decent # of trades). By this time, I had allot of systems with 1.30 pf. I started to think just using Static lots of say 1.0 or 10.0 forever, would be the best way to go because the Curve stays the same lol and because I could swallow the losses easier at those levels and the profits were marvelous. But that's just more curve fitting on Historical performance.
For a system like your's however, I would use a variable lot size of 1.29 percentage of Equity and not a Penny more. Because risk is subjective and personal, and I don't want to be subjective nor changing my mind constantly, I just use the profit factor. There are better ways of determining Risk-Adjusted-Returns. And I'm working on understanding them. Understanding the Math behind Risk-Adjusted-Returns is the Right of Passage so to speak for a trader IMO.
I think you should keep trying to hit 1.5 profit factor because that's where the Magic happens :). I'm a firm believer that your Offense is your best Defense. Sure with bad money management I can lose trading a system with 5% edge just like losing with 1.3% edge. But forget text book 2%, I'll gladly risk 5% on 5% pf any given day and go down in a blaze of glory. Than try to figure out how to make a 1.3% pf system comfortable for me to trade. All IMHO.