Which strategy do you think is superior from your experience or experiments

[Alain Verleyen]

It would be interesting to know why the majority (7 of 8 when I am writing) are thinking that a strategy with market orders is "superior". Personally I voted for pending orders as they don't have slippage (in theory).

[Tonny Obare]

Dont worry ange everyone has their opinion.

[Pasi Hakamaki]

I prefer to enter the market with trend, that is why I use pending orders.

[Tonny Obare]

Candles:
I prefer to enter the market with trend, that is why I use pending orders.

But have you tried with market orders and what challenges made you stick with pending. I think it would be good to discuss the ups and downs like ange said.

[Pasi Hakamaki]

tonny:

But have you tried with market orders and what challenges made you stick with pending. I think it would be good to discuss the ups and downs like ange said

I like them because when my pending stop order executes it is always by a tick that is in my preferred direction. I have never used market orders consistently.

[Ubzen]

angevoyageur: It would be interesting to know why the majority (7 of 8 when I am writing) are thinking that a strategy with market orders is "superior". Personally I voted for pending orders as they don't have slippage (in theory).

Imo, market orders allows you to evaluate conditions the moment before entering the position. Pending orders do-not work well for this because of the stop_level and other limitations. These limitations operates more like slippage or serve to delay the opportunity. Example_1: if( spreads==0 ) OrderSend(....); Example_2: if( EURUSD_Spike && GBPUSD_Spike) OrderSend(...); These are usually conditions which you don't know when nor where its going to happen. And lets face_it thats about 99% of trading.

The notion of Pending_Orders not having Slippage is a Myth. The only types of Pending_Orders which qualifies as No_Slippage would be the Limit_Orders [ Buy@Price_Or_Lower ] && [ Sell@Price_Or_Higher ]. The Stop_Orders || StopLoss_Orders have no guarantees for the specify price or better. Stop_Orders are usually at the specified price or worse.

If someone is programming savvy and trading with an Expert or Script, they do-not have to accept the Slippage either. They can send the order with the slippage==0 or none. If the broker gives them the old_slip, just say no-thanks, I'll try again later. On the next tick, you evaluate the conditions again and if(true) re-attempt. Either give me the price I want or better or I'm not getting in.

Pending orders works best for manual traders who may be away from keyboard when their triggers (namely price) happens. These types of orders have very little value for an auto_trader whose terminal is always connected.

[Simon Gniadkowski]

Ubzen:

If someone is programming savvy and trading with an Expert or Script, they do-not have to accept the Slippage either. They can send the order with the slippage==0 or none. If the broker gives them the old_slip, just say no-thanks, I'll try again later. On the next tick, you evaluate the conditions again and if(true) re-attempt. Either give me the price I want or better or I'm not getting in.

It would be interesting to know if this is the case with all Brokers for MT5,  I know it is not the case with all Brokers for MT4.

[Alain Verleyen]

RaptorUK:
It would be interesting to know if this is the case with all Brokers for MT5,  I know it is not the case with all Brokers for MT4.

Can you be more precise, what "case" are you talking about ?

[Alain Verleyen]

Ubzen:

Imo, market orders allows you to evaluate conditions the moment before entering the position. Pending orders do-not work well for this because of the stop_level and other limitations. These limitations operates more like slippage or serve to delay the opportunity. Example_1: if( spreads==0 ) OrderSend(....); Example_2: if( EURUSD_Spike && GBPUSD_Spike) OrderSend(...); These are usually conditions which you don't know when nor where its going to happen. And lets face_it thats about 99% of trading.

The notion of Pending_Orders not having Slippage is a Myth. The only types of Pending_Orders which qualifies as No_Slippage would be the Limit_Orders [ Buy@Price_Or_Lower ] && [ Sell@Price_Or_Higher ]. The Stop_Orders || StopLoss_Orders have no guarantees for the specify price or better. Stop_Orders are usually at the specified price or worse.

If someone is programming savvy and trading with an Expert or Script, they do-not have to accept the Slippage either. They can send the order with the slippage==0 or none. If the broker gives them the old_slip, just say no-thanks, I'll try again later. On the next tick, you evaluate the conditions again and if(true) re-attempt. Either give me the price I want or better or I'm not getting in.

Pending orders works best for manual traders who may be away from keyboard when their triggers (namely price) happens. These types of orders have very little value for an auto_trader whose terminal is always connected.

Of course not all strategies can use pending orders. But for a given strategy, which allow pending orders use, how could you say that market orders are better than pending orders (or reverse) ?

[Ubzen]

RaptorUK: It would be interesting to know if this is the case with all Brokers for MT5,  I know it is not the case with all Brokers for MT4.

I haven't tested all brokers especially mt5_brokers. I wondering if this could be because some ECN provides the so_called best price for market orders. Of course, I don't mind the positive slippage. However, wouldn't you say thats how the Slippage Parameter in OrderSend() was intended?