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
)) So it's almost the same, only the investment trades a balance/equity chart)).....
It may be simpler, but it's the same eggs, only from the side ))))
I agree. Only there are even bigger non-trading risks there, because we don't know who is on the other side - we don't know the adequacy of the trader.
_ But I've come to the conclusion that I prefer to trade my EA's balance chart... it's much more predictable than the price chart... the trend is easier to catch.
Good move, clever. What's left to do is to increase "derivative order", the number of EA parameter variants, and decide on the "strength" of each parameter set.
I've estimated that "derivative order" more than 3 is no longer profitable..... very few trades come out. ... .. "I've estimated that "the strength of the parameters" is a separate topic and they need to be checked and reviewed after each deal..... There are relatively stable parameters for the long term....., but they make less profit( - I have to look for stable microstates.
Give someone a 100 GHz computer ))
Give me a 100 GHz computer))
No problem ))))
Um, multithreading is good)). I'll be moving to MT5 anyway... but for now it's easier for me to debug and invent on mt4....
Came to some conclusion that investing in equity pams is akin to trading forex - same drawdowns, same unknown future....))))
IMHO, investing in pums is even more difficult. The main problem they have is the extreme instability of this very equity. In principle, it would be possible to make a good portfolio out of the stable series of equity pams, but sharp bounces (mainly downwards) spoil the whole picture. When a loss occurs almost every manager takes it as his duty to raise risks up and see if he will be lucky and as the result a "pumping" becomes a "bombing bomber".
IMHO, investing in pums is even more difficult. The main problem with them is the extreme volatility of that very requity. Basically, it would be possible to make a good portfolio out of the stable series of equity pams, but sharp bounces (mainly downwards:) spoil the whole picture. When a loss occurs almost every manager takes it as his duty to raise risks up and see if he will be lucky and as the result a "pumping" becomes a "bombing bomber".