Wishes for MT5 - page 6
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
I didn't mention 9 years of practical experience in this matter for nothing - this topic is closed.
The reason is simple - MT5 does not allow bars with zero tick volume.
For those who want to easily and understandably circumvent the problems associated with unsynchronised bars of trading instruments:
look out for full working MT4-ECN solutions - they were created for traders, taking into account their long-standing informed wishes. Unfortunately, MT5 is inferior to such solutions in the trading part in many ways...
The reason is simple - MT5 does not allow bars with zero tick volume.
look out for full working MT4-ECN solutions - they were created for traders, taking into account their long-standing informed wishes. Unfortunately, MT5 is inferior to such solutions in the trading part in many ways...
Verbatim, with the real situation being more or less exactly the opposite.
And please keep in mind that MT5 has not been released yet, nor has it really worked with the exchanges. There is beta testing in progress. Wait a few months - step by step all the features of the system will open.
Verbatim, with the real situation being more or less exactly the opposite.
And please keep in mind that MT5 has not been released yet, nor has it really worked with exchanges. Beta-testing is going on. Wait a few months - step by step all the features of the system will open.
A brief comparative analysis of MT4-ECN and MT5:
Sounds a lot like bloated software, spiced up with marketing ticks.
Anyway, they couldn't even get the table right - they made up their own distinctions to be misleading.
Also, I have no doubt at all that all of the above glitches with terrible force and has a lot of limitations, being a custom add-on for some one or more companies. It cannot become a mass-produced product.
In their attempts to stand out, marketing experts of some companies (being our clients!) are not even averse to make a great comparison table (it happened more than once in relation to MT4) and invent new names for old solutions.
I appreciate your point about the Cossack. No, I am an independent party. And the name MT4-ECN was invented by me.
Perhaps overconfidence and disregard for other people's products are qualities which help you to promote your own product...
Anyone can have doubts about a product. Both MT4-ECN and MT5. I can only say for myself - I actively use all above points in real trading on MT4-ECN. I did not notice any glitches, that is why I listed them point by point.
Concerning points 6 and 7:
The issue of reliable implementation of cumulative position structure accounting has been raised many times. Even in tech support, this problem has you assigned a "Pending" status. You still have not presented a simple EA that can work independently of the others. So you can always stop it and run it anywhere, and it will pick up information about its previous actions and its state. It is thanks to point 11 that this problem is easily solved in MT4 by means of MQL4.
You don't fully realize the functionality needed by a trader-programmer. For example, collecting ticks by yourself is great. But what if the connection is broken or something like that?
It's great to understand that you can do everything yourself via FIX API. But why should everyone reinvent the wheel?
Regarding point 9:
Analyzing the situation based on Bid-bars is one-sided. As well as on the basis of Ask-bars. With a floating spread, the adequate estimation of the tester's results can only be based on the Avg-bars. And the entire logic of the Expert Advisor should be symmetric with respect to Bid/Ask prices. I.e. based on the average price and its history, as well as on the spread history.
Yes, it is unpleasant to hear criticism of your product, I understand. But let's treat each other with respect. I am an independent trader-programmer and from my experience I know what functionality I and my colleagues demand. Note that we are not talking about frills, but about really important conceptual things.
I did not say or mean anything about the Cossack. Although the list of items is full of twists and special understatements.
In MT5 there is an aggregate position and we haven't promised to provide any means of working of multiple Expert Advisors on a single symbol. This follows from the very ideology of the aggregate position. Trading more than one Expert Advisor on the same symbol is nonsense. But there is no need to start a new chorus on this subject.
If someone from our company has responded gently (status deferred), it only means that they do not want to be confrontational. Unfortunately, I am the one who has to dot the i's and cross the t's.
About the tics: a lot of practical experience allows us to make balanced decisions. I've been saying for years "there is no truth in market noise", but pipsers don't believe it (they learn only from their own experience), demand ticks and come up with "average bars". In general, MT5 has a spread for each bar, which solves a lot of problems in the tester.
We have made automatic access to the huge M1 history for each symbol. And traders are already making complaints because of the amount of traffic and resources required.
ps: to understand our decisions, you need to take into account that a sufficient part of external requests are poison pills, which lead to the death of the project. but not everyone thinks about it, because they live in a one-way evaluation mode.
Note, MT4-ECN does not provide an unlimited tick history, only a certain number (thousands) of extreme ticks through MQL. And believe me, it's enough to significantly extend the scope of price analysis and increase profitability.
About the deliriousness of trading several Expert Advisors on one symbol:
Rude, but where did you get that from? In the current MT5 it is not only impossible to trade with several Expert Advisors on one symbol, but you cannot trade with one hand and one Expert Advisor on one symbol. So you have given only two options: either with hands or with one Expert Advisor. There is no other way! What is used by practicing traders you call nonsense.
And you won't understand about Avg-bars in the tester until you trade and start analyzing certain situations. It's normal for you that in MT4 and MT5 all analysis is one-sided. Why the Bid-bars and not the Ask-bars? You think there is no difference. In the Strategy Tester, test the strategy using Ask bars and see the striking result with Bid-bars. The logic should be symmetry (equality), not one-sidedness.
About the netting concept:
It has been publicly shown how MT4 turns into netting position accounting. That netting is not a concept, but an agreement on the presentation of trading information.
With all due respect, have some courage to question the inflexibility of your points.
I hate to break it to you about Currenex, EBS etc.
If you do pips in rltime - no problem, they are all in front of your eyes and the experts pass. Trade, but don't demand deep tick charts (that's what they demand, not the last 1000 ticks).
Trading multiple EAs (or hands) on the same symbol at the same time is nonsense/fatality in its purest form. Of course, no one forbids simultaneous management of an aggregate position, but the consequences are your responsibility.
The one-sidedness in MT4 is only because the tester uses a fixed spread and in fact the ask may not be correct. In MetaTrader 5 the spread is stored in each bar, which means that the asc will be modelled almost 100% accurately.
"Publicly shown to be turning MT4 into a netting position" has resulted in US brokers starting to lose business, closing US divisions and providing such terrible accounting that it once again shows what crutches under the slogan "give, don't mess with my brain with consequences and that's it" lead to.
Renat, you are twisting things about the NFA. What reporting are we talking about when you yourself have admitted that even profits in some cases on MT4 are counted incorrectly? All reporting issues are handled through virtual positions on the broker side. You know very well about it, as you know companies who successfully do it under the much more stringent regulators in some European countries.
I will not argue about Avg-bars. It's a practice. Just put an EA on a demo with a floating spread. Then run it in the tester on Bid-bars, Ask-bars and Avg-bars. And see which result is closer to the truth. You haven't done this kind of research and don't even see the logic in it yet.
A simple example of "delusional and fatal":
there is one expert standing. He opens one position. I decide to share in the same direction (you think it is nonsense). The Expert Advisor machine crashes. I launch the Expert Advisor on another machine. How does it know its share in the aggregate position? Based on the history of FILLED orders?
P.S. Please, let me know about Currenex and EBS. I would be grateful to you. I always admit that I don't know something. Although, having traded through NewEdge, I haven't noticed anything to get upset about.
I'm not twisting the NFA's words, because I definitely know more and deeper, rather than superficially "there are solutions, so it's OK".
The "lottery vs netting" debate is over.