The future of automated trading - page 15
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
Better create a thread "The future of manual trading in light of the release of the most powerful autotrading platform MT5". :o) The resonance will be different.
All these arguments are familiar, about 5-6 years ago the same thing was said about MetaTrader 4. There were arguments that it would never be what it is now, they were referring to the authorities and so on. Now all these disputers have drunk a lot of water and do not remember their arguments. True, some myths are replaced by others, but they are bigger at each new turn.)
All these arguments are familiar, about 5-6 years ago the same thing was said about MetaTrader 4. They used to argue that it would never be what it is now, they referred to authorities and so on. Now all these disputers have drunk a lot of water and do not remember their arguments. True, some myths are being replaced by others, but they are more ambitious at each new turn. :)
How has MT4 changed fundamentally over these 5-6 years? It has remained the same. There are fewer bugs... MT5 is coming. It is good. But the business model is what it was and what it is, this trading platform is designed primarily for brokerage companies (they pay and order music), and traders do ... they get a free terminal, and they should be happy. But nothing is free in this world, except cheese in a mousetrap...
The only improvement of the terminal from trader's point of view - for these 5-6 years I see - more buffers and OnTimer().
All these arguments are familiar, about 5-6 years ago the same thing was said about MetaTrader 4. There were arguments that it would never be what it is now, they were referring to the authorities and so on. Now all these opponents have drunk a lot of water and do not remember their arguments. It is true that some myths are being replaced by others, but they are more ambitious at each new turn. :)
Mm-hmm. But if you happen to lose this sector, don't say you weren't warned. I left a sector that the leader company lost just like that, on the wave of an epic success story.
What's the point of arguing if no one wants to listen to valid arguments? Well, look at it yourself, MT terminal has been the terminal for kitchens, and it still is, but there are more kitchens (and consequently the sales of MQ have increased). Those traders who "survive" after the kitchens, "grow up" and go to the new level of trading, to "adequate" brokers. And MT in this sense has remained in place. How many hopes for MT5, hopes that MQ will also "grow up", but what is the result?
The only improvement I see to the terminal from a trader's point of view over these 5-6 years is the appearance of more buffers and OnTimer(), while all ...
Language. You probably can't appreciate it yet, but the language will give strength. mql4 was a complete mess. The product model is a little close to normal. Don't know what's up with the API. And there might still be something coming. Anyway just trust me, MT5 is making a strong statement. This is me speaking as a doctor.
--
Yes, I forgot. Exceptional situation handling. The terminal doesn't crash now. (This thing was invented back in the 80's :))
Language. You probably can't appreciate it yet, but the language will give you power. mql4 was a total mess. The product model is a little close to normal. Don't know what's up with the API. And there might still be something coming. All in all just trust me, MT5 is making a strong bid.
Yes, I forgot about the OOP language, I agree it is better, but it is still an application. From my point of view, it is still an application, we need ready-made libraries, EA builder, we need a graphical interface, we need a glass (once the exchange is opened) and consequently the functionality of working with the glass, a lot of windows. The debugging is killing me. If everything remains the same - codebase dump. Yes there are interesting libraries, examples, but you can't expose them for real without rechecking (debugging)... The articles on how to write and create a PBX are given to outsiders, who can not represent the entire depth and features of the platform.
I wrote above about reliability, speed and accuracy, they haven't changed. And from my point of view (as an amateur, though) reliability has fallen, the number of checks that need to be done when writing an expert has increased at times ... My code may be different ... but I have to work, I need to bring home a piece of bread... I don't need it ... I'm a trader, I have an idea, I want to check it, I wrote a check ... but I want to spend months on code development, let the programmers debug it, I need to work, bring home a piece of bread... Instead of digging in the code, why is it different in tester ...
+ 1000. I mean the same thing. You have to understand that AUTOTRADING primarily automates certain MANUAL operations (regardless of whether it is trading or analysis).
It seems that there is a clear substitution of meaning (without pointing out that in different cases different positions), leading to incorrect calculations, people do not want to get involved in calculations (for table positions are not clearly described in the form of a table), at what expense subject lives?
As soon as the positions are distributed in the tabular form the proof is immediately dissolved because of distinctly visible errors.
The question was originally not even about what we ended up with.
The question was about (if you remember, read the whole post) that there are two algorithms in NETTENGO trading system when working with open positions concerning TRANSVERS and REVERSES:
1. Recalculate price
2. Fix the current result and open a NEW position
So I just wondered why YOU as the developers chose the second model?
All figures given in the question just to make it clear MATHEMATICALLY what I mean.
Here is a REAL EXAMPLE from trading on DEMO in MT5
GBP account - 10000
Open a position and reversed it when it was losing (important!)
Here is the order
1. Sell EURJPY at 112.904, volume 0.10
2. After a while, we decide to reverse the position (for whatever reason). For that, we buy 0.20 volume from the market.
Result of the trade operation
Open position is Buy at price 113.387, volume of position is 0.10
In the history of trades I clearly see fixing of loss equal to 36.28 pound!!!!!
PS
There is no need to calculate anything here. It is necessary just to explain why there is a fixation of profit/loss, and not recalculation of opening price.
IF IT IS NOT CLEAR - I WOULD BE MORE SATISFIED WITH VARIANT WHEN PRICE OF OPENING OF NEW POSITION WAS RECALCULATED TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THESE -36.28...
PPS
I can only imagine how glad the brokerage company will be if I exceed in this way, say, 10% of my deposited positions. I will do it 10 times in a row :)
Now...