Is martin so bad? Or do you have to know how to cook it? - page 17
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
If you do not know what the others do not know, or you do not know anything? I, for example, have not heard anything about it and I can't imagine how anyone could force such cooperation, so I don't risk going to jail for fraud and blackmail.
I know, I do not assume. Neither fraud nor blackmail can be proved, because nobody documents this collaboration, there is no direct communication about it verbally or in writing. But a professional trader feels the broker's reflection of his trading, how much he enjoys working with the broker based on what MM schemes. When they hurt him or her and when they do not hurt him or her and allow to earn.
The trader who understands brokerage business structure, should understand how to work in symbiosis with them, and the best way is to diversify accounts, first ones for calm trading with relatively stable profit and extreme ones for brokerage profit, in order not to disturb quiet accounts. This is not a criminal behavior and this is a good way to do business for traders who do not want to waste their time dealing with connection breakdowns, requotes, re-quotes, and so on.
The question is undoubtedly silly to think that PAMM accounts owners are in league with the broker, it is easier then for the broker to initiate these accounts, there are already a lot of IlanSovietnikovs in the Internet. The broker has more profit to make without it. Another thing is that the initiators of such accounts multiply, and the number of such accounts also increases.
But the market is changing, and they always invent new algorithms, more appropriate to the current market situation, which have positive profit with a standard lot, but with martin or any other MM dispersing a lot at flush or just playing with a big standard lot, an EA will be very attractive for an uninformed client, but it is guaranteed to lose profits of a DC. There is no sense for brokerage companies to open trading accounts on fictitious persons, it is more profitable to deal with enthusiasts with glowing eyes who understand how to be profitable for themselves and for the broker.
I know, I'm not supposed to...
So many people have an unequivocal and rather negative attitude towards martin... That's up to you. I have always wondered: (for opponents of martin) do you have a good TS? Of course in your head, some people may have it in the form of an Expert Advisor. OK. Coming to the terminal, with what probability will you determine the direction of the trend? If you got it wrong the first time, what is the chance to determine the direction after 2 tries, 3, 4... Obviously, a sane trader does not risk more than a few percent per trade. So where did the stereotype that a margin call is a loss? Do you admit that 5-7-10 times in a row you can be wrong on trend detection?
It's my personal opinion, you can keep your criticism, I'm not forcing anything on anyone. If a trader trades more than 60% of profitable trades - martin will increase this number to 100%.
SZS. Well, if a person systematically trades that he is under 10 consecutive trends in the negative, how does he trade in general then))))
I wrote about the concept of Martin, and not about using it in a particular TS - My opinion as an addition to a profitable TS is good).
So many people have an ambiguous and rather negative attitude towards martin... That's up to you. I have always wondered: (for opponents of martin) do you have a good TS? Of course in your head, some people may have it in the form of an Expert Advisor. OK. Coming to the terminal, with what probability will you determine the direction of the trend? If you got it wrong the first time, what is the chance to determine the direction after 2 tries, 3, 4... Obviously, a sane trader does not risk more than a few percent per trade. So where did the stereotype that a margin call is a loss? Do you admit that 5-7-10 times in a row you can be wrong on trend detection?
It's my personal opinion, you can keep your criticism, I'm not forcing anything on anyone. If a trader trades more than 60% of profitable trades - martin will increase this number to 100%.
SZS. Well, if a person systematically trades that he is under 10 consecutive trends in the negative, how does he trade in general then))))
I'm just talking about the concept of Martin, and not about using it in a particular TS - my opinion is that it's a good addition to a profitable TS).
I agree. There is some illusion about martin that it may be more profitable than other strategies. Here's a public EA, martin (attached is the stats), annual ROI of 68% on 3,000 initial deposit. MT4 sorry and has been holding since last February.
I don't do signals on it only because I want to move it to MT5 ... But otherwise, martin is fine, if you have no illusions about its super profitability.
passka:
Так откуда сложился такой стереотип что мартин - это слив!? Вы допускаете что 5-7-10 раз подряд вы можете ошибиться на определении тренда?
It's all very simple - pure mathematics. If the probability of a single guess is 0.5, then 10 mistakes in a row is about 1/1000 probability. And the same increase in capital required. Therefore, once in a thousand you will need a capital of THOUSAND times your stake. If you risk just one percent of your deposit, the probability of losing is much higher, as it will only take 7 losses in a row.
Martin is just moving frequent small losses into a zone of rare but big ones. And the only way to win with it is to move all frequent losses into the zone of rare ones, so that one will not meet with a large probability of losing during the whole life. However, the capital required for this will increase exponentially. I used to think that in order not to lose even once in your whole life - you have to have several million times more capital than your initial bet. And now the question - who wants to hold ready ten million dollars for a guaranteed one-dollar win? Over a lifetime with this approach, one dollar at a time, you could win ten to twenty thousand dollars. For which you will always need to keep on hand the capital of 3-5 million dollars. There's no point in that.
Can you tell me if it is possible for an EA to open multiple orders in one click (2-5) on the same pair and the same chart.
It's all very simple - pure mathematics. If the probability of a single guess is 0.5, then 10 mistakes in a row is about 1/1000 probability. And the same increase in capital required. Therefore, one time out of a thousand will require a capital of THOUSAND times your stake. If you risk just one percent of your deposit, then the probability of losing is much higher, as it will only take 7 losses in a row.
Martin is just moving frequent small losses into a zone of rare but big ones. And the only way to win with it is to move all frequent losses into the zone of rare ones, so that one will not meet with a large probability of losing during the whole life. However, the capital required for this will increase exponentially. I used to think that in order not to lose even once in your whole life - you have to have several million times more capital than your initial bet. And now the question - who wants to hold ready ten million dollars for a guaranteed one-dollar win? Over a lifetime with this approach, one dollar at a time, you could win ten to twenty thousand dollars. For which you will always need to keep on hand the capital of 3-5 million dollars. There's no point in that.
And if the probability of guessing is say 70% and the average no-guessing rate is 1-2, then the capital is already ridiculous)
It's all very simple - pure mathematics. If the probability of a single guess is 0.5, then 10 mistakes in a row is about 1/1000 probability. And the same increase in capital required. Therefore, once in a thousand you will need a capital of a THOUSAND times your stake. If you risk just one percent of your deposit, then the probability of failure is much greater - it will only take 7 losses in a row.
Martin is just moving frequent small losses into a zone of rare but big ones. And the only way to win with it is to move all frequent losses into the zone of rare ones, so that one will not meet with a large probability of losing during the whole life. However, the capital required for this will increase exponentially. I used to think that in order not to lose even once in your whole life - you have to have several million times more capital than your initial bet. And now the question - who wants to hold ready ten million dollars for a guaranteed one-dollar win? Over a lifetime with this approach, one dollar at a time, you could win ten to twenty thousand dollars. For which you will always need to keep on hand the capital of 3-5 million dollars. It makes no sense at all.
Better to think about the fundamentals. What is a martin? It is a reinforcer that allows you to strengthen the profit component more than the loss component. Consequently, margin requirements increase more slowly than profitability. If you have an understanding of what you are doing, everything will be fine.