Discussion of article "Expert Advisor based on the "New Trading Dimensions" by Bill Williams" - page 2
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
Updated the advisor class
There appeared some discrepancies in testing this Expert Advisor on different computers, MetaQuotes-Demo quotes. Period 2010.01.01 to today. Instrument EURUSD. H1
The example includes only the first entry and a reversal on the fractal, "Closing behind the opposite Alligator boundary" is used.
The archive contains the Expert Advisor itself, set of settings, report from the tester.
I tried to delete the EURUSD history and upload it again from the server, the result is the same.
Who has time and desire, please check it.
where to download the archive?
sorry but I can't see it !!!
Hello Alexey,
I'm really interested in your work. I'm also trying to implement an expert advisor for the "New Trading Dimensions" strategy, but I'm still using MT4. Perhaps we could share our results? I'm surprised that almost all the EA created on this strategy are not profitable. Does that mean that this strategy is no more applicable in today's market? The rules are quite clear and easy to program to create an automatic system, and if this strategy is working manually, then it would be logical that a trading system based on it should also be profitable.
I'm also implementing this strategy, and not the one in the last book using the divergent bar wiseman. It is not a good signal and often we are stopped and we see an other divergent bar forming. In the profitunity course, the rules have been changed too. Before we enter after 3 reds or 3 greens on the AO, we should now wait for a valid fractal breakout.
Well, back to the "New Trading Dimensions" strategy.
Have you done other tests so far? If you're applying the EA on a daily chart, one year of testing is not enough I guess. As we see on your chart, there are only two trends during that period. If however we use the 4H or even the 1H chart and test for 1 year, we would have a better period of testing. What do you think?
When are you entering a trade? How do you look for a sleeping alligator?
I was trying to use a trailing stop strategy too for the exit of a trade, but I've removed it. I'm using the 5 bars in the zone, the close below the green line, the close below the red line and a signal in the opposite direction as an exit. The exit using the 5 bars is the zone has the highest priority, and I'm closing my orders only if the total profit of all orders at the stoploss level is positive.
My next exit is a close below the green line (in an uptrend). I close my orders only if the total profit is positive and the was no close below the green line since the beginning of the trade (first fractal breakout entry).
Then I exit on a close below the red line if all my orders are profitable.
If none of those conditions is satisfied, then I exit and reverse on a valid fractal breakout in the opposite direction.
Cheers,
Daniel
I've checked a bit the entries on your second chart, and there seems to be something wrong for me.
Do you see at the middle of the down trend how many red zone bars there are? After 5 bars in the zone, we should look to take profit. We close the current orders as soon as a bar breaks above the previous bar high. It should often be closed in profit. In the case on your chart, I think they would be closed in profit. Then all the sell orders near the bottom of your chart would not be opened because we have to wait for a sleeping alligator and a fractal breakout as the first signal.
Those 5 bars in the zone can also happen at the beginning of a move and the orders would not be closed in profit if we use the zone trailing stop. In that case I would not close the orders and keep on adding new onces.
Hi Alexey
I tried to compile the EA but it seems failed me. i have put the files into correct path in MT5 folder
It throws this error message ,under h_TS_BW.mqh file
declaration of 'inp_param_tmp' hides member declaration at line 184
is there any changes need to be done before compiling ?
regards
kevler
The author has done a great job in writing the EA. But I went a different way, as I have never trusted and do not trust full automatons even with specific formalised trading signals as in this strategy. The strategy is holistic, consists of 3 books and has basic signals:
1. Divergent bars (SCUAT)
2. Signals of the 3rd consecutive bar of the AO histogram + "Special Blue Light"
3. Fractal performance signals.
4. Divergences.
6. Zonality by 2-book New Dimensions....
7. Saucers - changes in momentum.
8. Histogram transitions through zero of the AO indicator + "special blue light".
"Special Blue Light" is one of the most powerful signals. Market consolidation in the right direction with the subsequent breakout or cancellation of the signal.
It seemed dangerous to me to instruct an Expert Advisor to enter on every signal without examination. I made an Expert Advisor that informs about the signal, creates convenience for its audit for strategy compliance and then creates conditions for trade automation. I made the Expert Advisor in the form of a signal-trading panel. Unfortunately, it is impossible to test the panels in the MT5 tester. That's why I made a detailed description of the Expert Advisor and posted it here https://www.mql5.com/en/market/product/437, if anyone is interested in this strategy. Plus I have upgraded a number of indicators for the strategy, which show all the signals on the chart for easy analysis if the template is made correctly. Here are the links:
The scripts act as a budget variant of the Expert Advisor itself.
The article mentions using standard classes to create an EA. The main standard class is, as far as I understand, the CExpert class, but there is no mention of it. I respect your work in any case, but I can't decide for myself when to use CExpert and when not to. I am just starting to think about this issue, so any of your comments can be invaluable and reduce the time for writing my own EA. Should I or should I not extend the standard EA class and when is it more justified and when is it not?
I will consider all your advice as a professional with great gratitude. Thank you!
you should use break; to end loop when you find fractal :-)
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//| Search for the signals from the 1st dimension |
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
bool C_TS_BW::FindSignal_1_dimension(int type,double &price_out[],datetime &time_out[])
{
int i,copyCount=-1;
double tmp_buf[1];
price_out[0]=-1;
for(i=3;i<50;i++)
{
copyCount=CopyBuffer(h_fractals,type,i,1,tmp_buf);
if(copyCount<1){return(false);}
if(tmp_buf[0]!=EMPTY_VALUE && price_out[0]==-1)
{
price_out[0]=tmp_buf[0];
CopyTime(m_Symbol,m_Period,i,1,time_out); // copy time of the fractal found
break;
}
}
return(true);
}
Great article! Many thanks to the author for his hard work. Too bad that today's MetaEditor (build 1643) generates warnings (in the attached file) when compiling the head file h_ts_bw.mqh.
and when trading (on a demo account) with the selected option constant lot=0.1 after making another entry the Expert Advisor starts generating
on each tick (!!!!) orders to open positions with unimaginable volume. If you do not stop this outrage by reloading the terminal, the Expert Advisor misses the refill.
the Expert Advisor misses the replenishment.
Something is wrong here!
It would be good to correct the code!
Great article! Many thanks to the author for his hard work. Too bad that today's MetaEditor (build 1643) generates warnings (in the attached file) when compiling the head file h_ts_bw.mqh.
and when trading (on a demo account) with the selected option constant lot=0.1 after making another entry the Expert Advisor starts generating
on each tick (!!!!) orders to open positions with unimaginable volume. If you do not stop this outrage by reloading the terminal, the Expert Advisor misses the refill.
the Expert Advisor misses the replenishment.
Something is wrong here!
It would be good to correct the code!
Cleaned it up, fixed it: