Phoenix 2007 (new thread) - page 25
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
Another way.
If you have open GBPJPY open sell poistion, in deep loss position. Perhaps -42 pips, then the system calculate another alert for buy position, I think better you open this buy position, so you will have 2 orders. When it floats, it can floats to both direction, and both are profit.
It is not only hedge your current position, but it can also double the profit.
Thanks Eric! I think this is a usefull contribution to this thread.
Here is a way not to miss out on profitable trades if system is still open from an earlier trade.
Phoenix Piggyback System - Will be forward testing this system.
Have the two same systems running simultaneous.
1.) Start 1st system.
2.) When 1st system gets a trade, start 2nd system.
3.) If 1st system still is open and 2nd system gets a trade,
one can decide to close 1st system and open a reverse trade from 2nd system or if 2nd system opens in same direction as 1st system, then one can double up on 1st system and use it as a trade confirmation.
Will let you know what results are obtained.
Moderate Risk Test With FXDD
I am jumping into the pool here to test the Phoenix EA as well.
Broker: FXDD
Pair: USDJPY - M15
MaximumRisk: 0.1 (10:1 margin)
Initial account size: $25,000
Just have one initial observation as I get started. As noted, I selected the USDJPY. The settings for this pair call for the PercentDeviation on the iEnvelopes to be set to 0.0032. I always have the desire to view the TA visually if I setup an EA for testing - if possible. In the case of the envelopes set with 0.0032% deviation, the visual lines are extremely close to the price. Checking the iEnvelope definition in the MetaEditor Reference it's litterally passing the 0.0032.
So this being the case, the action of "Signal1" would be true quite often - or at least that is how it appears on the chart. Is this correct?
I will post my results along with the others, as we all participate in the test.
-harvester
Here is a way not to miss out on profitable trades if system is still open from an earlier trade.
Phoenix Piggyback System - Will be forward testing this system.
Have the two same systems running simultaneous.
1.) Start 1st system.
2.) When 1st system gets a trade, start 2nd system.
3.) If 1st system still is open and 2nd system gets a trade,
one can decide to close 1st system and open a reverse trade from 2nd system or if 2nd system opens in same direction as 1st system, then one can double up on 1st system and use it as a trade confirmation.
Will let you know what results are obtained.Open 2 trades one direction will increase the risk. If the market went to other direction, then it will damage the equity badly.
The risk=0.3 is the highest risk we can get with this EA. But if we increase the risk to 0.6, it will not have good result.
Firebird EA, the earilier version, before re-birth of Phoenix, is doing one direction multiple trades as well, and some of the versions are becoming very risky.
Thanks Bruno! Still a long time to go.
Hello,
Where is the version 4_2_03?
Thanks?
Hello,
Where is the version 4_2_03?
Thanks?in first post.
Too bad, your trade at Championship is ended with loss. it is floating for 2 days.....
.
Is Phoenix has resistance to news?
Live trading results
After 2 days live trading NF, had to turn it off this morning. I will post the result after closing the open trades , which BTW are all deep in the negatives.
Ross.
a little bug in phoenix
I'm originally intersted in algorithms instead of back testing results,i took close look to phoenix code yesterday, and it seems there is a little bug (not actuall bug) in divergence function:
maF1 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, F_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, F_Price, mypos);
maS1 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, S_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, S_Price, mypos);
dv1 = (maF1 - maS1);
maF2 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, F_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, F_Price, mypos + 1);
maS2 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, S_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, S_Price, mypos + 1);
dv2 = ((maF1 - maS1) - (maF2 - maS2));
return(dv1 - dv2);
you calculate (maF1 - maS1) expression twice and subtract them when you want to return them in line :
return(dv1 - dv2);
so it just simply a return of :
return(maF2 - maS2);
i changed it and the same result has been achieved, so i think first line of code is useless and we can rewrite the function like this:
maF2 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, F_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, F_Price, mypos + 1);
maS2 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, S_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, S_Price, mypos + 1);
return(maF2 - maS2);
so it will increase the speed of backtesting or correct me if i'm wrong,according to your first post we are not allowed to change the code, so please do it for us, and at last i apologize for my bad english.
i think first line of code is useless and we can rewrite the function like this:
maF2 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, F_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, F_Price, mypos + 1);
maS2 = iMA(Symbol(), 0, S_Period, 0, MODE_SMA, S_Price, mypos + 1);
return(maF2 - maS2);
so it will increase the speed of backtesting or correct me if i'm wrong,according to your first post we are not allowed to change the code, so please do it for us, and at last i apologize for my bad english.You are absolutely right.