Which strategy do you think is superior from your experience or experiments - page 2

[Ubzen]

angevoyageur: 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) ?

Do you have an example of such strategy?

[Alain Verleyen]

Ubzen:
Do you have an example of such strategy?

Not really. I thought you have one. If it's not the same strategy how can someone say that market orders is "superior" to pending orders, that makes only sense when both are applied to the same strategy and results compared.

[Simon Gniadkowski]

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

Yep: https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/143997/page2#773665

 

. . .  it also makes it possible to have an EA on GBPUSD and place Sell trades at Bid on EURUSD and USDCHF

[Ubzen]

angevoyageur: Not really.

Well lets take Fixed Negative_Grids as an example. Fixed meaning all the Grids are the same size appart. This is one of the Best example I can think of for Limit orders. However, I don't see any limitations when using market orders instead. In fact, someone might get better pricing on their Negative_Grids for reasons explained earlier.

If you take the same strategy and instead of Fixed Grids but use Volatility_Grids [Varying the Grid Sizes on Volatility] then one cannot use Pending orders because he would not know what the Volatility would be when the price is hit. Same could be said for Variable Stop-Loss vs Fixed Stop-Loss.

Of course some people might start talking about Losing_Connection. But then thats a totally different problem altogether.

Pending Orders might have some good application over Market Orders outside of Lost Connection. But I cannot think of any.

[Simon Gniadkowski]

Ubzen:
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?

Yes,  of course, and the mql4 documentation states that market orders can only be placed at Bid and Ask,  but this is not true for some Brokers. Either the Documentation is wrong or Brokers are doing something they shouldn't . . .  Service Desk, MQ Admin and one of the Brokers in question have been no help . . .  despite repeated requests.

[Ubzen]

RaptorUK: Yes,  of course, and the mql4 documentation states that market orders can only be placed at Bid and Ask,  but this is not true for some Brokers. Either the Documentation is wrong or Brokers are doing something they shouldn't . . .  Service Desk, MQ Admin and one of the Brokers in question have been no help . . .  despite repeated requests.

I'll do some research on this and see what I can find. Thanks.

[Alain Verleyen]

RaptorUK:

Yep: https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/143997/page2#773665

 

Ok, I see, but it's not normal behaviour, seems a bug on server side, not ? Anyway it's not really related to current topic.

[Simon Gniadkowski]

Ubzen:
I'll do some research on this and see what I can find. Thanks.

With some MT5 Brokers the open price is not part of the trade request,  you get the price you are given . . .  and deviation  (slippage)  is irrelevant   https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/13379/569794#comment_569794

[Ubzen]

angevoyageur: I thought you have one. If it's not the same strategy how can someone say that market orders is "superior" to pending orders, that makes only sense when both are applied to the same strategy and results compared.

Well with grid examples above, hopefully I've shown one strategy where there's virtually no_drawback to using market orders. But certainly some limitation to using pending orders. This makes me think that market-orders are 1 better than pending. But it's just my opinion and not an exact science.

[Ubzen]

RaptorUK: With some MT5 Brokers the open price is not part of the trade request,  you get the price you are given . . .  and deviation  (slippage)  is irrelevant   https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/13379/569794#comment_569794

If slippage is irrelevant, than it cannot be use as argument for pending orders, by saying pending orders avoids slippage and market orders doesn't :P

With the True processing of ECN orders, they look for the Best_Price. This is muddy waters because we no longer know if this is a good or bad thing for market_orders. Best price doesn't imply that it's cheaper nor anywhere near where you may want. So yea, point taken but there's no way of weighing the effects.