Simbasystem-gbpusd - page 67

[[Deleted]]

popok_sakti:
Hi Malcik & Franta,

Thank you for the code & discussion,

Original code is :

===============

if(SATL>SATL_Prev &&

(Close[0]>=SATL || !UseSATLFilter)

===============

In my opinion the variable UseSATLFilter will not have any effect at all, because

- if UseSATLFilter = true,

then it will evaluate (Close[0]>=SATL || !UseSATLFilter) as (Close[0]>=SATL || !true) or (Close[0]>=SATL || false)

So, it still will choose Close[0]>=SATL

- if UseSATLFilter = false,

then it will evaluate (Close[0]>=SATL || !UseSATLFilter) as (Close[0]>=SATL || !false) or (Close[0]>=SATL || true)

and again it will choose Close[0]>=SATL

So, the result of setting UseSATLFilter to true or false, will have no effect in the code, so I move it out,

or maybe You want it to be written this way :

if(SATL>SATL_Prev &&

(Close[0]>=SATL && UseSATLFilter)

So, instead of using ||!UseSATLFilter, We can change to && UseSATLFilter

Best Regards,

Popok

Hi, I dont know.

Need backtest method test/mistake maybe.

[popok_sakti]

Hi frantacech,

Thank you for your post,

Yes your're right, it turns out that using ATR for tp is not good, I'll remove it in the next revision of the code ..

Best Regards,

Popok

frantacech:
atr_for_tp=true; this is not good!!!

This popped lowers profit. I thinkthat the than take wretched 30pips, is better run together profit along. When the nothing else so used ATR TP only for BE or BE+1, or best Be+x and put trail TS 70pips. By hand show on Vegas4h and if am in righted direction, try keep in market what longest.

or ..if take atr tp, keep profit..1/3 position , modify SL to BE, if pure simba exit ...close next 1/3 position and last 1/3 trail

Run together profit !

[popok_sakti]

Hi Simba,

Thank you for your post,

Sorry for the stupid question, what does kv stand for ?

Best Regards,

Popok

SIMBA:
Hi,

I agree with you that the best option will probably not be in the low pips area..trailing stop we already have..the chandelier is a trailing stop..and the best option is not to let it ride(200 to 400 area is much better,this case 355,other kvs for chand same results area for tp,with tp300 approx the optimal),probably because exhaustion moves followed by quick reversals wipe a lot of the open profits..so either we execute the exit(s) in the 250/350 area or ,once we arrive at this area,we switch either to a lower tf chandelier

or to a lower kv settings for the 1h..

In addition,the atr is set at what and with what divider..if you take a look at most trades they were running for 2+ days so,I would start with atr 5(daily average for 1 trading week) and try dividers of 1,0.7,0.5,0.3,..etc..we will probably reach the conclusion that the lower the atr5 the lower the divider (the higher the multiplier )and viceversa..explosive moves come after low volatility periods..

Thanks a lot for your posts

Regards

Simba

[[Deleted]]

I see miracle No.2?

[Malcik]

popok_sakti:
Hi Malcik & Franta,

Thank you for the code & discussion,

Original code is :

===============

if(SATL>SATL_Prev &&

(Close[0]>=SATL || !UseSATLFilter)

===============

In my opinion the variable UseSATLFilter will not have any effect at all, because

- if UseSATLFilter = true,

then it will evaluate (Close[0]>=SATL || !UseSATLFilter) as (Close[0]>=SATL || !true) or (Close[0]>=SATL || false)

So, it still will choose Close[0]>=SATL ... yes, but the whole condition will be met only when Close[0]>=SATL. If not, the trade signal won't be taken, which is right, because we want the price to be above SATL

- if UseSATLFilter = false,

then it will evaluate (Close[0]>=SATL || !UseSATLFilter) as (Close[0]>=SATL || !false) or (Close[0]>=SATL || true)

and again it will choose Close[0]>=SATL... here we don't want to use the SATL for filtering, therefore the condition will always be met and the trade will always be opened

So, the result of setting UseSATLFilter to true or false, will have no effect in the code, so I move it out,

or maybe You want it to be written this way :

if(SATL>SATL_Prev &&

(Close[0]>=SATL && UseSATLFilter)

So, instead of using ||!UseSATLFilter, We can change to && UseSATLFilter

Best Regards,

Popok

Popok, yes you're right, and that's what I meant See comments in red.

When I was to it, I removed the ATR as well and added missing release info.

[popok_sakti]

frantacech:
I see miracle No.2?

Hi frantacech, it is very nice result,

What server did you try it on ?

I cant find any time control on the EA you posted

Can you post the one with time control ?

Thanks alot

[[Deleted]]

popok_sakti:
Hi frantacech, it is very nice result,

What server did you try it on ?

I cant find any time control on the EA you posted

Can you post the one with time control ?

Thanks alot

I do backtest with data from alpari, every ticks.

Time control still TODO.

[popok_sakti]

Hi Malcik

Thank you for pointing out the conditions,

I like to ask the following question :

- When we place buy or sell order, I see in the code You're using pass chandelier value ( 1 bar ago - time frame : h1 ), should it be the current bar ?

- The same for modifying an order, it seems the EA using value from 1 bar ago

On the other hand for closing, I think its ok because Simba want after the Chandelier confirmed.

Thanks alot,

Popok

Malcik:
Popok, yes you're right, and that's what I meant See comments in red. When I was to it, I removed the ATR as well and added missing release info.

[popok_sakti]

Hi frantacech,

Thank you

frantacech:
I do backtest with data from alpari, every ticks. Time control still TODO.

[[Deleted]]

Last revision with trading hour.

But backtest is better without trading hour. Hmm.

I think, EA ignore much good entries.

I run backtest and paused, load simba template to wisual windows and run.