Collaboration Dolly + Isakas + Nina System - page 30
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
Hi, guys. There is a great effort being put into developement and we all gotta keep on. Agree?
I'm worried of 3 issues:
1st - An entry should not be placed along the whole period even if signals are granted, but just on max x ordered
bars after signal. Or else according to value of stochastik, buy at the beginning of a half wave, sell opposite....simply, never again encounter situation like today when the buy was placed exactly one minute before the end of trend. Quite the reverse.
Perhaps an ideal solution would be watching out signal on M15 and if a valid signal arises on M15 then to take reaction as soon as the signal condition of opening position on M30 is obtained. It would have meant a finished bar with valide signal on M15, which shall happen about in the middle of M30 bar and to place entry as soon as a valide signal arises on M30. Not to wait for the end of a bar. Or optional, to wait for the end of a bar, or again optional to allow another x bars for entry.
2nd - An exit --- I've switched "on" Trailing Stop type 4 in EA - breakeven after 18pips profit at entry+1. It seems ok, but I expected that was just a safety guard against turning to losses, and EA closed with abandonment in accordance with the exit signal...I left default settings. After two days I haven't notised any exit after profit loss...weird..
3rd - Traiding hour - it is preset in some way in EA. For which broker and which Time Zone? There is an European and Asian session permited, but American session is not. What experiences come from that and is it ideal? I'm personally scared of Asian session little bit. What do statistics, practice and experience say?
This EA is completely excelent basis, but it needs much debugging.
I hope what is stated herein is comprehensible enough despite my non-native english.
Regards to everybody.
worries
frantacech,
I already tried what you suggested.
It worked fine for the one bad trade you refer to but over time it misses many good opportunities by entering late.
It is not usually a good idea to modify an ea based on a single loss. This is a long term strategy. I am still trying to find a way to get less drawdown.
I also tried BBSqueeze and had the same problem. Too many missed trades or worse entries. In the long run had way less profit.
Robert
worries part two
Times are for FXDD.
Asian session sometimes has a good trade and usually is a smooth movement in price.
New York session had the most losses on backtest.
I tested the different trailing stop ideas on another ea and none of them helped. I did find a few bugs so I will need to do the same with this ea to see if the bug is here also.
Had more to do with valid stop loss in modify order.
Robert
Just an idea
All EA's posted at here are still not satisfied enough to follow DIN EA rulez.
I think I will work by myself for it
Hope someone can help and we can work here togetherI think the first EA 1.1 Mrpip used pure Isakas rules.. that should be a good one ... there are two problem facing isakas EA and every EA
1- When the market moves sidesways on narrow bands, we get false entry points, Bollinger sqeez indicators posted here earlier should help solving this porb.
2- The second problem is, in a strong down or up trend, there are small swings between fib levels, and since Isakas detects the move from the start it will give a signal that will allow only 10 to 15 pips of profit, I would say in this case it’s a false entry point.
Those two problems face every EA and I am not sure how to solve it but this is what I suggest
We use beside isakas rules some other rules to get a more healthy trade that would reduce the numbers of trades but should increase the profit/loss factor
1- A moving average is simply a way to smooth out price action over time, we try to use a reasonable moving average trying smooth the price and get rid of some of the peaks due to news. maybe use crossing EMA as a confirmation entry point for longer time frame trades( instead of 30 min we targets 1H -4H just an idea)
2- To solve problem no.2 we have to know that there are two types of indicators leading and Lagging: A leading indicator gives a buy signal before the new trend or reversal occurs. A lagging indicator gives a signal after the trend has started, so we need to use a lagging indicator to make sure that we are in a trend ( again I am talking about high time 1H or 4H not 30 min) as using a lagging indicator means we have missed the isakas entry point because isakas will detect the trend from the start, OR we have already entered but with that indicator we discovered that we are trading against a strong trend so we exit and try to find another good entry point against the first one. NORMALLY Oscillators ( like Stochastics, Parabolic SAR, and the Relative Strength Index (RSI))are leading indicators, and Momentum ( like MACD ) indicators are lagging indicators.
It’s a lot of work to get an EA to perform well over long time, in my opinion the EA should function exactly like a technical trader. Currently Isakas is used for 30 and 15 min charts, maybe we should consider Isakas for longer time frames, where we are able to apply technical trading rules maybe that would be the solution to get a good EA from isakas ….
frantacech,
I already tried what you suggested.
It worked fine for the one bad trade you refer to but over time it misses many good opportunities by entering late.
It is not usually a good idea to modify an ea based on a single loss. This is a long term strategy. I am still trying to find a way to get less drawdown.
I also tried BBSqueeze and had the same problem. Too many missed trades or worse entries. In the long run had way less profit.
RobertRobert
I would not worry about too many missed good traders I would only worry about the bad entries, if we got an EA to place only good traders ... lets say 5 good traders per month, and if the EA does well on different currency pairs then by increasing the lots size and risk factor, and we can also get more money by using the EA of different currency pairs. Too many rules will limited the number of traders but hopefully should increase profit over loss.
Thank You Big Joe for posting EA.
PartyPips
Times are for FXDD.
Asian session sometimes has a good trade and usually is a smooth movement in price.
New York session had the most losses on backtest.
I tested the different trailing stop ideas on another ea and none of them helped. I did find a few bugs so I will need to do the same with this ea to see if the bug is here also.
Had more to do with valid stop loss in modify order.
RobertMrPip
I do not use the EA to trade - I trade manually, I am just using the original Zeman system using Stars and BB without any other indicators. I do not have problems with losing trades during the NewYork session on demo and live account since Zeman started posting his system last year. Can you post which pairs had problems since I only use it for GBPUSD, EURUSD and USDCAD? Its great that you are trying to get an EA to trade this since I also dislike sitting in front a screen all day....
Keep up the good work...
Robert I would not worry about too many missed good traders I would only worry about the bad entries, if we got an EA to place only good traders ... lets say 5 good traders per month, and if the EA does well on different currency pairs then by increasing the lots size and risk factor, and we can also get more money by using the EA of different currency pairs. Too many rules will limited the number of traders but hopefully should increase profit over loss.
Guess, MiniMe is right, i think the DIN EA need be like a pro trader, choose only best trades, profit factor may be increased by using more intellectual tralling stop and more traded instruments.
More spesific rule
MrPip, MiniMe, Frantacech,
Thanks a lot for your willingness, I know that I am still learning MQL language, so I cant help too much
I will state the rule for EA more specific and easier to understand
The logic for DIN EA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Entry for Sell condition, picture attached
1.if the closing candle lower than previous candle then 2, else 6
1.if Bband Stop=red ; Heiken Ashi MA=red then 3, else 6
2.if Fisher m11=red then 4, else 6
3.if StepMA Stoch=crossing red ; Magenta(color) crossing below Aqua(color) then 5 else 6
5. Open SELL 0.1 lot SL=30 trailing stop=15 (this setting changeable)
6. No trade
return (0)
The Entry for Buy condition, picture attached
1.if the closing candle higher than previous candle then 2, else 6
1.if Bband Stop=blue ; Heiken Ashi MA=blue then 3, else 6
2.if Fisher m11=blue then 4, else 6
3.if StepMA Stoch=crossing blue ; Magenta(color) crossing upper Aqua(color) then 5 else 6
5. Open BUY 0.1 lot SL=30 trailing stop=15 (this setting changeable)
6. No trade
return (0)
Less trades is always less profit?
maybe using money management rules, change that?
Kelly's formula
This method defines the optimal percent of risk. Relatively to gambling and further, to stock trading was developed by professor Edward Thorpe. Kelly's method defines the percent of risk as
Kelly% = %win – %loss / (Avg_profit / Avg_loss )
Let's look at how the Kelly Criterion might work. Suppose you have a system that has a winning percentage 60%. Your system also has average profits that are twice as large as the size of your average loss. Thus, %win = 60%, %loss = 40% and Avg_profit / Avg_loss = 2. Kelly % = 60 - 40/2 = 40%
Thus, the percentage of equity bet that would provide a maximum rate of return is 40%.
Number_of_shares = (Kelly% * Current_Capital / starting_risk_per_unity_of_assets)/Security_Price
where starting risk = maximal loss at trade(in %).
Example:
Current Capital - 25000$
Security Price - 50$
Kelly - 0.20 (it's calculated on the basis of the historical data)
Maximal Loss at trade - 25% (it's calculated on the basis of the historical data)
In this case you can buy (0.2 * 25000/0.25)/50 = 20000/50 = 400 shares
Optimal f
Optimal f (optimal fixed fraction) - method of estimating the optimal % of risk has been improved by Raplh Vince. Using the optimal f strategy, you can optimize your system for the variable f (with "f" being the amount of capital invested in each trade) so that your system achieves the highest net profit (or TWR as defined by R. Vince.) Optimal f is calculated the optimal value of f is independent of the order in which the trades take place. Changing the order or sequence of trades does not affect the final out-come. Most people think that the optimal fixed fraction is that percentage of your total stake to bet. This is absolutely false. To define how much shares you have to trade we use the next formula:
Number_of_shares = (Optimal_F * Current_Capital / starting_risk_per_unity_of_assets)/Security_Price
where starting risk = maximal loss at trade(in %).
Example:
Current Capital - 25000$
Security Price - 25$
Optimal f - 0.30 (it's calculated on the basis of the historical data)
Maximal Loss at trade - 50% (it's calculated on the basis of the historical data)
In this case you can buy (0.3 * 25000/0.5)/25 = 600 shares
What do you think?