Is there a need for a lock in MT5? - page 18
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
Head-on question. How many times have you used loco?
I use a quick double counter turn more. I had the lock in one of the versions of arbitrage. But I had to remove it later and replace it with a normal close, as it sometimes led to a shortage of funds when attempting the same locking. Locked positions require margin, which is not good for multitrading.
Not to mention that OrderCloseBy() is not always successful at the first attempt, and one has to insert an additional piece of code to overlap at the next start() call.
Why do you need me to change my view of loci?
And if I remove the red colour, will you start mentioning on every forum that you really need loki and prove it to other netophiles? (Sorry if you think that's an insult - I didn't mean it as an insult.)
Yeah, you're right, I'd rather go fishing (we've got salmon in full swing)
- The Loki's don't get in the way.
- We don't care if they're in 5 or not.
- I really do not understand why they may be needed (with one exception which is not discussed in this thread) but NO ONE HAS SUGGESTED
- the comparison to the red one does not work
__________________________________________________________
The only possible use of Loks in MT4 is in the following situation
You work with the hands according to the indicator, get a signal to buy a lot, buy, after a while buy 2 more lots, buy, after a while buy another lot, buy, after an hour 8 buy order and a signal (on the news, the rapid movement) to close all the buy
We cannot avoid slippage, here we may block the amount, and before going to bed at calm calmly close everything, but that is not what we are dealing with in this topic
And that's not the problem in 5K.
It's about the "position" or its structure.
The market doesn't care what your position is composed of or how you take into account its structure and how many Expert Advisors it has, all that matters is the bottom line - the "position".
The market does not give a damn how you will take it into account, whether it is a pencil on a piece of paper or an mt4 order in the terminal, but in all cases this is BACKGROUND
and this is just your problem.
The first derivative of a cow is beef, the second is sausage and you have sausage the first derivative of a cow )
+15
Who says that logic is correct?
;)
1. a lot is two isolated trades. In a lot system a deal=positions, read two positions.
2. yeah, so what? netting also eats spread.
3. Too lazy to rewrite the speculation of a special case...
So?
How do you think I (with almost 6 years of experience) and many other "experienced" traders, such fools, could not find a profit from locks, and you and 001 found it?
Yes, I agree that there may be systems based on networks with a continuous recovery of spent orders, possibly reversed, possibly through a step, with a start from different price levels (in order to catch absolutely all market movements)... and in this kind of system, counter positions will periodically appear... both comparable and with different lots, but.... the very moments where these positions will overlap... they are or they aren't... They're neither useful nor detrimental... As they say - tear them off and throw them away... Equity won't notice.)
To end this pointless discussion, I'll repeat the question I posed in the mkl5 thread a couple of weeks ago and didn't get a single example of it:
Give me at least one example, with the use of a loc that ends up being more profitable than without using it, but using one position.
You see - there is no one-size-fits-all. Locke can lead to profits as well as losses. And you argued that it only leads to losses. After all, the phrase "A position locked in minus equals a position closed in minus" represents a definite loss, doesn't it?
Yes, at the moment of locking you will have a loss almost equal to what you had at the time of locking. Whether I claim it or not makes no difference.
At least I wouldn't advise anyone at all to believe various claims (everyone can be wrong, even the most reputable authorities). You can use the tester to measure equity using the AccountEquity() function right after the locking and to check for yourself once again right after the unlocking: no miracle happened, equity remains the same (apart from the loss of spread on the position closed to unlock it). If the loss occurred during locking, it will remain after the so-called "breaking".
1. a lock at opening is a no position minus the spread = minus the spread.
2. a lock at the moment of closing one of the positions is a positive position minus its equal negative position and minus spread = minus spread.
3. The use of locked positions with a different stop/profit ratio (lock-net) is
a) a positive position minus its negative ones minus the spread on each of the positions minus the slippage between small positions within a large position = minus the total spread and minus the slippage distance;
b) several positive positions minus one negative position equal to their sum minus the spread on each of the positions minus the slippage between the small positions within the big position = minus the total spread and minus the slippage distance.
001 and fellow unfortunates, any other logical maths questions?:)
Not a single question on the maths. I do know one thing. Lock deprives DC of profits, and those profits go to me, UNLESS certain rules are followed. You follow the rules when you open and close positions. There are also rules when dealing with lots.
There are a million people on the net who will prove that you can't make money on the stock market or forex. The grounds they have are the same as the loco wrestlers. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO IT. That's bullshit.
. I know one thing. Locke is depriving DCs of profits...
:)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Anyway, on that subject...I can make you happy - no sane DC will cancel MT4 unless they are threatened with serious sanctions. Why? Because loki is possible in MT4 :).
I will not write here anything more about this theme until somebody will show me a profitable example with a lock that cannot be repeated without it.
How do you think I (with an experience of almost 6 years) and many other experienced Forex dealers are such fools who couldn't find any profit in Forex, but you and 001 did?
.......
Give me at least one example, with the use of locs, which will end up being more profitable than without using it, but using one position.
There is nothing simpler than that.
You open a position, put a stop. The stop is off (30 pips for example). One case.
The second. I opened a position and set a lock instead of the stop. The order triggered. If the price moved away at 30 points *10=300 points, i.e. the lock is 10% of the price change, if the price passed through 30*10-30 (the lock) = 270 (to the locking position). I.e. if the price passes 270 pips in the reverse move, another 30 pips will pass with a very high probability, as this lock is only 10% of the whole price movement.
This is one example. In short, a stop is a loss of money. A lock is a temporary freezing of this loss. Since the market is flat more than 70% of the time and only sometimes there are trends between fluxes, it makes no sense to cut the balance using stops.
In addition there are options to close the lock in + even if the price has irrevocably moved away from the lock. Yes, yes, as paradoxical as it sounds. (This logic is implemented as part of Expert Advisor in the first post)
Regarding six years or more. Question: have you done a good search?
Do you think I (with an experience of almost 6 years) and many other "experienced" forex dealers are such fools who couldn't find any profit with locks, while you and 001 have found it?
Yes, I agree that there may be systems based on networks with a continuous recovery of spent orders, possibly reversed, possibly through a step, with a start from different price levels (to catch absolutely all market movements)... and in this kind of system, counter positions will periodically appear... both comparable and with different lots, but.... the very moments where these positions will overlap... they are or they aren't... They're neither useful nor detrimental... As they say - tear them off and throw them away... Equity won't notice.)
To end this pointless discussion, I'll repeat the question I posed in the mkl5 thread a couple of weeks ago and didn't get a single example of it:
Give me one example, with the use of a loc, that ends up being more profitable than without using it, but using a single position.
I won't give any examples. Not because I'm greedy, but because they are obvious and available to everyone.
All you have to do is run the terminal and, as has already been mentioned here: move your brain a bit.
)))
Not yet, because personally, I do not consider the lock as a strategy, as the only TS, or TS built on the open lock.
Lock is a tactic, a tool, a hammer to hammer nails or a fly swatter to hammer flies ...
)))
In general, if we're going to talk about the loch, we should have started dancing from the stove, from the lot accounting system,
which allows lots and must be seen as a single mechanism...
!
Nettingsters mention lock exclusively here: loss, but there are 9 (!!!) types of locking.
And at least half of the types don't even cause heart palpitations... Half of the other half just needs attention.
Which, by the way, is not superfluous in any case...
But why immediately fools? I wrote about it specifically above, well, here's more, more detailed:
Some people just can't understand, others can't accept, others are graduates of the famous "bakery academy",
There are many reasons because everyone is different. Like traders, everyone trades but 95% lose and only 5 profit...
I've been trading in the stock market for six years and I didn't start with it immediately, because it was too shady and the terminal was not MT.
But I got hooked on mt, and like in driving school, in about six months I confidently passed the "city", and now "eight-lane devil" is not terrible.
I've got a certain force of habit and I still forget about trailing stop.
Well... I'm telling you, everyone is different in their abilities or habits...
Yes, few topics polarise the forum community as much as the topic of lokas.
...
That's it, I won't write anything more on this topic here until someone shows me a plus example with a lock that can't be repeated without it.
I don't think anyone can write such an example. Because you're right. But you're only right about this. The lock is needed, if not by you, then by someone else. And not to get a "plus example" at all, but as a way of not mixing bears and beef in the same pan.