
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
You can, but as Zhunko correctly answered, it won't give you anything (in terms of practical results). If the question was understood correctly.
There is no point in synthesizing an EP from two indices. More or less interesting is when it is possible to get more VPs than source currencies, i.e. at least starting with four.
It is still very raw, but there are some results.
The figure shows the change in balance/equity (bottommost window) when "working" in four currencies since the beginning of today's day.
And there are already six currencies in this picture
I highly recommend the article "Ukraine is being prepared to be eaten" http://2000.net.ua/a/60558?p=0
I am not a big proponent of apocalyptic forecasts, but I have been feeling a bit uncomfortable lately. In this connection I would like to ask traders, where (besides speculation:) do you think it makes sense to invest money now, at least not to lose? Real estate seems to be too early to buy, the dollar is predicted to collapse...
(Xadviser, sorry for the slightly off-topic)
I'm not a big proponent of apocalyptic forecasts, but I've been feeling a bit uncomfortable lately. In this regard, I would like to ask respected traders, where (apart from speculation:) do you think it makes sense to invest money now...
In food stocks...
(Xadviser, sorry for the slightly off-topic)
Yeah, nothing, almost on topic. Actually one of the main conclusions is that forex is a system where everything can't go down at the same time, something is still going up. So as long as it exists, it will be the most "reliable" means of investing.
But the point is different. The current monetary circulation system is flawed and is unlikely to be reformed in the near future, although attempts have been made to do so http://imperiya.by/economics2-4002.html (a cardinal difference in the properties of money). Therefore it is necessary not to invest money, but to create an income-generating system (no matter in what form, monetary or in-kind).
In the food supply...
I can't eat that much... )
Therefore, money should not be invested, but a system that generates income (whether in cash or in kind) should be created.
I don't have a theoretical problem. I have a "system" (a business). I just had to, hypothetically speaking, take TP due to the crisis. I will go in again when I feel the bottom, but who knows how long it will last? That's the problem: at least not to lose in this year or two (hopefully). Such is the prose...
I can't eat that much... )
I meant it in all seriousness. I didn't mean for personal consumption.
I don't have a theoretical problem. I have a "system" (a business). I just had to, hypothetically speaking, take TP due to the crisis. I will go in again when I feel the bottom, but who knows how long it will last? That's the problem: at least not to lose in this year or two (hopefully). Such is the prose...
Is TP a take profit?
I don't know, of course, the specifics of your business, but crisis should always be seen as an opportunity.
Is TP a take profit?
I don't know the specifics of your business, but a crisis should always be seen as an opportunity.
Yes, TP is a take profit - i.e., put everything in cash and very successfully (business is a kind of speculation, but downside does not work.).
And I certainly see the crisis as an opportunity, but I can't see the bottom yet... and during this time all dollars can become a phantom( That's the question - how to save?
the business is a kind of speculation, but it doesn't work downwards.
Intrigued... Porridge is good and can be cooked....
But speculation is not a system that generates profits.
It's true. So we must not save money (dollars, rubles, etc.) but value, or even better a need.
And the bottom of what?
P.S. humour: "The market has bottomed out and started digging..." :-)