Market theory - page 215
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
Finally! You are an amazingly quick thinker! Leverage is related to TS and MM, but not to deposit growth. I disagree - Buffett (his last name is spelled with two 't's) is definitely one of the greatest investors in the world. Yusuf claimed that his bot doubles the deposit in 2 weeks, i.e. about 45% increase in deposit per week, I just advised to concentrate on stability.
Indeed, running the algorithm on M5 since the beginning of the year cleared everything up, nothing surprising happened, just 27 07 entered, by chance, very successfully on the last ascending branch of the balance/equity curve (see small screenshot). Overall the TS leads to a neutral, break-even and profitless trade. There is still a lot of work to be done.
Bars in test 45863
Ticks modelled 90717
Modelling quality n/a
Mismatched charts errors 0
Initial deposit 1000000.00
Spread Current (16)
Total net profit 26584.96
Gross profit 515987.18
Gross loss -489402.22
Profit factor 1.05
Expected payoff 1.45
Absolute drawdown 38926.17
Maximal drawdown 99031.68 (9.34%)
Relative drawdown 9.34% (99031.68)
Total trades 18310
Short positions (won %) 9036 (40.52%)
Long positions (won %) 9274 (35.12%)
Profit trades (% of total) 6918 (37.78%)
Loss trades (% of total) 11392 (62.22%)
Largest
profit trade 100.20
loss trade -100.52
Average
profit trade 74.59
loss trade -42.96
Maximum
consecutive wins (profit in money) 325 (29983.50)
consecutive losses (loss in money) 747 (-42794.91)
Maximal
consecutive profit (count of wins) 29983.50 (325)
consecutive loss (count of losses) -42794.91 (747)
Average
consecutive wins 26
consecutive losses 43
There are a few questions:
1. By applying the same TS and changing the lot size with leverage do you change the profitability of the trades?
2. How can Buffett NOT be a sucker if his returns would not even rank in the top ten of any pammers ranking in any kitchen?
1. it's hard to say something without knowing the TS, you need to analyse the specifics.
2) It depends on the rules of evaluation - if you consider the absolute value of the deposit growth, Buffett will probably take the first place among pammers.
... that, according to this market theory, forex trading is surprisingly organised around 2 break-even points, which rules out the very possibility of long term profits.
I highlighted the key words... But in this case, too, your statement has broken the causal link...
There are other key words here - "surprisingly".
Indeed, running the algorithm on M5 since the beginning of the year cleared everything up, nothing surprising happened, just 27 07 entered, by chance, very successfully on the last ascending branch of the balance/equity curve (see small screenshot). Overall the TS leads to a neutral, break-even and profitless trade. There is still a lot of work to be done.
Bars in test 45863
Ticks modelled 90717
Modelling quality n/a
Mismatched charts errors 0
Initial deposit 1000000.00
Spread Current (16)
Total net profit 26584.96
Gross profit 515987.18
Gross loss -489402.22
Profit factor 1.05
Expected payoff 1.45
Absolute drawdown 38926.17
Maximal drawdown 99031.68 (9.34%)
Relative drawdown 9.34% (99031.68)
Total trades 18310
Short positions (won %) 9036 (40.52%)
Long positions (won %) 9274 (35.12%)
Profit trades (% of total) 6918 (37.78%)
Loss trades (% of total) 11392 (62.22%)
Largest
profit trade 100.20
loss trade -100.52
Average
profit trade 74.59
loss trade -42.96
Maximum
consecutive wins (profit in money) 325 (29983.50)
consecutive losses (loss in money) 747 (-42794.91)
Maximal
consecutive profit (count of wins) 29983.50 (325)
consecutive loss (count of losses) -42794.91 (747)
Average
consecutive wins 26
consecutive losses 43
Slippages and swaps over such a period will bring your TS to utter sadness. We have to think what to do with the lion. It will eat up the deposit.
Only significant bursts are interesting. But maybe there is an error in the calculations?
There was one here - doing 10% a day - essentially the same thing. Where is he? Gone, Vassili...
So I'm thinking... Yusufkhoja, why don't you write an article in some normal magazine? Why is "article" here? I suggest you consider UFN (if accepted, I don't think so, but if there was something to accept, they would).