again on the tester - page 5
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
Haven't you heard of indicative quotes either? Spread is just the difference between a bid and ask.
One thing is not clear ... Why would you build charts in MT using indicative quotes, if there are real market quotes? All decisions on positions management, indicators and other tools are made on the basis of chart analysis. Thus, it turns out that the user of the terminal is deliberately misled.
It's like I'm in the middle of an exposé... you already know this very well.
The intra-bar simulation of ticks does not match real ticks not only in terms of price values, but also in terms of the number of ticks. It means that when working with limit orders (to exclude requotes) there can be (and are) significant differences even between demo-trading and tester-trading.
I repeat: "No sequence of ticks that happens is repeatable in the future". First, prove that any random sample (or selection) of ticks is worse than some "real" set of ticks. It is for the purpose of testing a strategy, not to accurately replicate the behaviour of that strategy in the past.
One thing is not clear ... Why build charts in MT using indicative quotes, if real market quotes are available? All decisions on positions management, indicators and other tools are based on the analysis of charts. Thus, it turns out that the terminal user is deliberately misled.
The charts are always plotted on the indicator. Ask your broker about the misleading and about the indicator. The client terminal simply and simply broadcasts exactly what the trade server gives it.
there you go, Prival's been slaughtered....
It's not the first time, by the way... What for?
I repeat: "No sequence of ticks that happened is repeatable in the future". First, prove that any random sample (or selection) of ticks is worse than some "real" set of ticks. It is for the purpose of testing a strategy, not an exact replication of that strategy's behaviour in the past.
I am waiting for a response to my post on the previous page. In the meantime, let me draw your attention to this phrase: "No sequence of BARs that has happened will be repeated in the future". Prove me wrong ? You talk about ticks, I talk about bars. Prove it?
If you look at it from a strategy testing point of view. Fine. Make non redrawing Renko charts, just like in real life. The value of the body is equal to the spread (you can double the spread). And strategies using only this indicator can come up with a van and a small cart.
there you go, Prival's been slaughtered....
It's not the first time, by the way... for what?
No one has been cut. There's a rarely reproduced bug in the local editor. It happens when you write a post, then click on some link in the same browser window to open it in a new window or in an adjacent tab, then go back to writing the post. Once the post has been submitted, it's cropped. Our webs are aware of this, but can't reproduce it.
The charts are always based on an indicator. Ask your broker about the misrepresentation and the indicator. The client terminal simply and simply transmits exactly what the trading server gives it.
I don't have any claims to my broker on this issue. I just thought it was always like that. But the example given by the author makes me think.
I repeat the post.
For
I take it you're cleaning up the real evidence. Unseemly. You ask for it. And then you quickly erase
We don't clean it up because it's not nice. If anything, we tear down the whole thread at once. This is a forum bug.
If it's not too much trouble, please read it again. As a friend of mine used to say after another blackout: "the second time you write it twice as fast. the third time three times as fast..."