Virtual Trading - martingale solution - page 2

New comment
 

this could work, but what if the price never comes back !!

so in this way you need to trade with +ve sawp only and I would suggest use correlation hedge instead of normal hedge, for example if you have a trade stuck on EURUSD use USDCHF as a corrlated hedge , since the rnage of the USDCHF is larger and can cover up the losses faster , sure you need to keep in mind that the pip value of the USDCHF is less, but this pair is more active than EURUSD , so I would suggest to try hedging using USDCHF

hbud:
Hi mini, hi all

Besides some other stuff, I'm constantly working on 10points and 5th element EAs too.

For example one of the 10p3 with modified trailing stops gave me a meager 18%profit in eurusd for the last 2 months. But the expert survived the huge moves at least.

And what really worked out well for both of them is going with the trend only,

instead of countertrend trading or putting them blindly in the market.

But to the topic above,if we pick up omelettes proposal and instead of "virtual trading" the upper levels

(which is the same as -let losses run- as far as I understand it)

the EA could freeze them, by hedging the sum of all open lots in the opposite

direction. ( No real further martingale trades would be opened from now on )This requires not more lots than they would be needed for the next step of the original martingale. ( next martingale-step lotsize minus the initial lotsize we have started with : 0.1 + 0.2 + 0.4 + 0.8 = 1.5 = 1.6 - 0.1 )

By this the account equity dosn't move a single millimeter.

And when the sea calms down and our pair is going to move in our favorite direction, the EA closes the hedgetrade.

This should be repeated one level above if we are on the wrong side again.

I think the spread would probably eat up the profits and maybe we would get out with some (small) losses, but after that we still have an existing account.

What do you think?

Or do I have overlooked something?

hbud
 
hbud:
.....

due to the aleccoh story, have you already seen some of your money back?

I'm not updated on this. I think I have to go to the other thread for reading the latest posts.

hbud

I successfully withdrew most of my deposit when it became clear that Aleccoh could no longer be trusted - eg. preach that scalping was "illegal" while simultaneously running a scalper EA on my Managed account (btw, it was this EA that hedged, but as I said, it still lost money...)

I lost the $500 I left in the account as 'play-money'...

PS. - Aleccohfx is bankrupt, with little chance of anyone seeing a return of their deposits (according to the Liquidator). Aleccoh stopped posting once this bankrupcy became known publically, even though AFX seems to have held this status for months...

 

Interesting. btw, I added that 'NextLevelSL_On' switch at the time, in the hope that it would give a rough indication that the filtering I was attempting was indeed providing an 'edge' of sorts - with it enabled, a blown account can't happen, but you can be 'nibbled' into bankruptcy!

The main problem with this is that while you can severely filter your trades, I could see no real 'edge' to doing so - instead of this filtering, try selecting the trades at random, opening a similar number for the period in question - you will get a similar result as probably 70-80% of all trades would have been profitable anyway, and within the max. levels set. (whereas probably 95% would 'eventually' have proved profitable after possibly severe drawdowns) Also, the PF is unacceptedly low, which is why I gave up on it...

One final point, though I do not know exactly how MT deals with timeframes during backtesting, I'm pretty sure that unless an EA specifically trades EOB, (10point3 doesn't) selecting higher timeframes for backtesting is less accurate as you are dealing with interpolated prices...

 

Martingale is against the adage of cutting losses and letting your winners run.

 
jbfx:
Martingale is against the adage of cutting losses and letting your winners run.

I agree , but if you have a good signal lets say for example RSI >80 or RSI <20 you would be tempted to capitalize on the move and not let go of the trade even if the market went againt you a little bit.

as an oversold could be more oversold , so it may take some pips before you get what you wanted, it all depend on the develper and how sure he is from his setup.

I am not in fav of martingles but I have a couple of good entries where I prefer to scale in or add more trades instead of having big SL, its just a matter of how bad you want to stay in that trade , some trades you want to let go and others you want to hold on to it

 

Well, then you need to widen your stops and lower your position size. Or simply take only trades with high reward to risk ratio. If you are wrong, get out. Stop trying to be right.

Stagger your stops and add on to winners. Move to BE and let it ride.

 
jbfx:
Well, then you need to widen your stops and lower your position size. Or simply take only trades with high reward to risk ratio. If you are wrong, get out. Stop trying to be right. Stagger your stops and add on to winners. Move to BE and let it ride.

thats the concept add to the winners , some trades need room to breath , so you can add to them if the price went a bit against you, as you already know your signal , at the end of the day it all depend how sure the coder are from his entry logic.

I am not a martingle fan but the concept is valid so we try to make the best out of it in a safe way

 

The concept of adding to winners is not adding lots to your losers, it is actually adding lots as the trade goes in your favor. But I understand what you are saying, your cost averaging type martingale is valid. You must be an expert of your system, and apply every time, so it becomes part of your system analysis.

But do keep the same stops for each added lot? Or do you stagger out the stops for each added lot?

The problem with your logic is that if you are correct on your initial trade, and the trade does not retrace, you are not in the trade with your full trade lot, thus your system is based on a retrace after your entry to maximize your profit. I'm certainly no fan of that, but everyone has their own taste.

 
jbfx:

But do keep the same stops for each added lot? Or do you stagger out the stops for each added lot?

My TP is small , its around 10 pips but SL is 4 time the TP,The win ratio was prety good and the entry is rather soild, so what I am testing is to see if i can remove those losses completely, for the time being my SL has increased but on the backtest it hasn't been hit yet " mostly because I am not able to backtest it right " so I am demo testing it, to confirm the logic

 

Martingle with hedge closing

Hi Guys,

Let me to add since im start to get interest in martingle strategies.

i have wonder one thing about martingle concept that could be implemented with vise versa hedging technic. Examples;

lets say the first post is going for long, and suddently the trend has changed to short and unluckyly worst and worst until max layers... lets say 5th... then the margin getting lower and floating become more bigger.

My idea is (not sure somebody has figure it out!) to open an opposite post from the earlier post. examples: buy 0.1,0.2,0.4,0.8,1.6 then, sell 12.8 (all has to be same TP setting).

My calculation has found that when 12.8 hit TP, it will cover all layer opened b4.

Howerver the worse case is that what happen when 12.8 reverse?

My question is... during the reverse, can we set the 12.8 lot to close post when only 12.8 profit = 0 (only close the 12.8 ya)? And can we apply these rules repeatedly?

Just my 2cents... at least we have save our ass from big float stress...

PM me if youre requires full concept. i have sketch my startegy in details. hope to get an EA programmer to code it

1234567
New comment
Reason: