Terminator v2.0 - page 20
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
I see your point, Tom... I've never crunched those numbers myself. Also, I read Project1972's post on the subject and if he's right (that currencies trend more in the positive swap direction than the negative), that would be a compelling reason too.
Hades291 has an interesting concept, too.. along the lines of diversifying/avoiding correlation. Not easy to implement, though, because some currencies always fall on one side or the other. JPY, for example, can't be balanced because it's always positive on the short side. I looked at project's list of pairs and came up with these possible balancing scenarios:
EURJPY ---Only LONG
EURUSD ---Only SHORT
NZDUSD ---Only LONG
~~EUR and USD balanced, JPY and NZD not
CHFJPY ---Only LONG
EURCHF ---Only LONG
EURCAD ---Only SHORT
AUDCAD ---Only LONG
AUDNZD ---Only SHORT
~~CHF, EUR, CAD and AUD balanced, JPY and NZD not
USDCAD ---Only LONG
AUDUSD ---Only LONG
~~USD balanced, CAD and AUD not
I'm curious if others feel that this would be beneficial...
Alternative
Hello traders,
Since We all now talking about positive swap and negative swap. I would like to share with all fellow traders some info.
Instead of thinking of positive swap, I'm using no interest account / islamic account / syariah account(whatever your broker call it)
currently im still forward testing Terminator 2.02 with default setting in live account and my acc is no interest mini acc with IBFX. so far until nov still generating profit with long & short position.
IBFX is charging 0.5 pip comisen instead of -ve or +ve swap for no interest acc type.
for example
if u buy 1 mini lot e/u = usd100 and 1 pip = usd1
so the comisen charged is 0.5 x usd1 = usd0.5 cent only. per position fixed charge one time only whether the position is open for 1 day or 1 month.
based on Tom explanation that trade with positive swap which make the EA profit by half. and based on hades291 explanation to balance / hedge the long and short position.
I would recommend to use this type of account to eliminate the swap problem. I believe the swap amount is very little compared profit that this EA will generate and not worth it to sacrifice half profit just to stay for a longer term and earn +ve swap.
Cheers,
CF
P/S : currently starting this month im not trading using EA until nx week as starting NOV the market have been trending and will look market reaction to USD this week and continue using the EA nx week. Also I have a open position in AUD/USD pair with maxtrade from 0.01 to 5.12 lot with 5.12 lot -113 pip .
Will post later how i overcome this without blow my live account.
Thank you for the explaination of the Islamic Account, CF.
The interesting thing about this positive swap discussion is we are all talking about profit, just different ways to go about it. In a sense perhaps we are all correct.
I suppose my main point is in a case of a lower maxtrades setting where the market has moved against you on an account that pays/charges swap. Trading in the direction of positive swap could be an added safety factor if one is forced to hold positions for relatively lengthy periods of time.
It is not intended to be a method to maximize trade profits using this EA. It is just a different method of employment. It would lessen one's market exposure and thereby risk. The lower the risk, the lower the profit everything else being equal...i.e. number of currency pairs.
Just a point of view.
tom
It is not intended to be a method to maximize trade profits using this EA. It is just a different method of employment. It would lessen one's market exposure and thereby risk. The lower the risk, the lower the profit everything else being equal...i.e. number of currency pairs.
Just a point of view.
tomYes, agreed . If not intended to this EA. But anyway, its just an opinion and point of view, depend on individual to decide.
BTW, TOM, are there any updates ur doing to Terminator 2.0.2 to improve it.?
Hi guys,
here is the Version i use actual... There are some changes happend now i have a question...
Is there somebody who can code a hedging function in it, he should only hedge all the opened positions... The funtion should be able to turn it on/off... Also for thr hedging positions the we should be able to set an own TP/SL/TS... And when the EA closes all the positions from the mainorder we should be able to close also all the hedge positions at the same time...
PROGRAMMERS !!! Please help !
Thank you !
mr.traderMr. Trader,
are u forward test this new EA?, can u share any forward test result.
currently im backtesting ver 3.1 with the default setting backdate to 2004 until now, but unable to get a good result yet compare to ver 2.0.2 setting
any progress will post later.
thank you
regard
CF
I tend to favor the idea of improving safety with this EA.. It's the closest thing I've ever seen to a 'holy grail' EA and we've all seen that it's a clockwork profit generator. The only (and very significant) drawback is the possibility of crashing when a long directional move strikes, and I think the main focus of further development should be on mitigating this problem. I can easily accept reduced profits if this EA can be made demonstrably safer...
I think I understand it's inner workings reasonably well, but I'd just like to be sure that I'm reading the code correctly. Would you guys please tell me if you agree with this assessment:
As I see it, the EA will close all positions in a Martingale progression once the most recently taken position hits its Take Profit point. Is there any other way of closing the positions that I'm not aware of? In other words, is it true that the system will close the open trades only when the most recent position hits the TP? Of course, I'm ignoring the Stop Loss feature, which I don't use.
Thx.
Brian-
I tend to favor the idea of improving safety with this EA.. It's the closest thing I've ever seen to a 'holy grail' EA and we've all seen that it's a clockwork profit generator. The only (and very significant) drawback is the possibility of crashing when a long directional move strikes, and I think the main focus of further development should be on mitigating this problem. I can easily accept reduced profits if this EA can be made demonstrably safer...
I think I understand it's inner workings reasonably well, but I'd just like to be sure that I'm reading the code correctly. Would you guys please tell me if you agree with this assessment:
As I see it, the EA will close all positions in a Martingale progression once the most recently taken position hits its Take Profit point. Is there any other way of closing the positions that I'm not aware of? In other words, is it true that the system will close the open trades only when the most recent position hits the TP? Of course, I'm ignoring the Stop Loss feature, which I don't use.
Thx.
Brian-I use the stoploss feature. It appears to me from backtesting that if the stoploss of the first position is hit, all positions will close. This means that the loss is large, but not account blowing, unless of course you have a small account. The program should make the lost amount back in about a month.
I use the stoploss feature. It appears to me from backtesting that if the stoploss of the first position is hit, all positions will close. This means that the loss is large, but not account blowing, unless of course you have a small account. The program should make the lost amount back in about a month.
Yes, there's a spot in the code that closes all positions once any one of them has been closed - for any reason - including me manually closing one or the broker closing one on a margin call...
I can't see any other code to close positions, though, except stoploss, so I'm thinking it's always left up to the TP of the most recently opened position...
I tend to favor the idea of improving safety with this EA.. It's the closest thing I've ever seen to a 'holy grail' EA and we've all seen that it's a clockwork profit generator. The only (and very significant) drawback is the possibility of crashing when a long directional move strikes, and I think the main focus of further development should be on mitigating this problem. I can easily accept reduced profits if this EA can be made demonstrably safer...
I think I understand it's inner workings reasonably well, but I'd just like to be sure that I'm reading the code correctly. Would you guys please tell me if you agree with this assessment:
As I see it, the EA will close all positions in a Martingale progression once the most recently taken position hits its Take Profit point. Is there any other way of closing the positions that I'm not aware of? In other words, is it true that the system will close the open trades only when the most recent position hits the TP? Of course, I'm ignoring the Stop Loss feature, which I don't use.
Thx.
Brian-Read post #47 on the thread which explains an additional method of how this EA closes trades.
Hope it's helpful.
tom
Currently testing
Hello Gents,
I'm currently forward testing this EA due to the fact that it is so similar to an EA that I run (binary) where it 'scales' lots, but my EA scales into the move and against the move. The compounding lot idea is the same. I just started the Terminator Thursday morning around 10:00 cst. Thank you all for your donations to the thread. Now please I need another donation. When I try to download my broker statement, I receive the notice that the file I'm uploading is 800x200 and I know I need the 600x600. I'm not too bad with the computer but this is frustrating the heck out of me. I've done all I know to do, please school me so I can post results. TTYL, Kevin