Is there a need for a lock in MT5? - page 19
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
Locked positions require margin,
I have two real non-price accounts. In different bank DCs. Locked symmetrical positions do not require margin.
And let me remind the loco-phobic arithmetic people: we work in real time, and we cannot ignore the time factor.
Prices are walking. Statically loc is a slight minus, while dynamically it is a solid plus, only with some delay. Not to see
You can only do this if you're blind, or if you don't want to see, or if you're a crook.
If the first time you didn't make it to the top, nothing prevents you from going in again. Well, there's gonna be a temporary loss
a couple more greenbacks.
Everyone has some tools at home (locksmith, carpenter, drawing, etc.) and if you do not use well, for example,
with a bolt (well, I can't or I'm afraid) you can't throw it away anyway.
And we have been forcibly deprived of such tools.
p.s. I do not remember who of the classics of the genre said: "Either a foolish or a greedy trader averages.
Netting is averaging in its purest form.
p.p.s. I wonder which of the two named above they hold us for?
I won't give any examples. Not because I'm greedy, but because they are obvious and available to everyone.
You just have to run the terminal and, as has already been mentioned here: use your brain a bit.
)))
I don't think so, because I personally 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 talking about the loch, we should start dancing from the stove, from the lot system of accounting, which allows you to loch
and treat them as a single mechanism...
!
Nettingsters mention lock exclusively here: loss, but there are 9 (!!!) types of locking.
...
Well answered.
By trailing cushion - experiment with parabolic, I haven't found any better. I am testing a modified parabolic for my needs at the moment, I'll let you know when I finish. It is already clear that the modified one can squeeze out much more than the standard one.
Z.U. In principle, the settings of parabolic in trailing can be found by means of a simple Expert Advisor. Open at a certain time, close when meeting the parabolic. Next, optimize all parameters and the settings are ready (like the simplest Expert Advisor, by the way, quite profitable, but that is not the goal). The main thing is to test Sell and Buy separately.
I don't think anyone could write such an example.
And this is true...
Because at netting with its single position, it is either bitten off or doled out with an offset forever.
i.e. this position crawls around the coordinates of the price chart\time like a cucumber-eating cockroach looking for the loo.
)))
Good answer.
On the trailing cushion - experiment with the parabolic, haven't found a better one yet. I'm currently testing a modified parabolic to suit my needs, and I'll let you know when I'm done. It is already clear that the modified one can squeeze out much more than the standard one.
Z.U. In principle, the settings of parabolic in trailing can be found by means of a simple Expert Advisor. Open at a certain time, close when meeting the parabolic. Next, optimize all parameters and the settings are ready (like the simplest Expert Advisor, by the way, quite profitable, but that is not the goal). The main thing is to test Sell and Buy separately.
>>((((((())).
We have our own mustache.
)))-(((
There is nothing simpler than that.
I.e. if price has passed 270 pips on the return, then another 30 will pass with a very high probability,
About six years or more. Question: have you done a good search?Thank you, I am amused. Tell me, if the price has passed 6500p (from St.2000 to now), then it turns out that the probability of going up 100p is just unbelievable, rather than going the same 100p down? (that's not a question, but just an excuse to think with your head rather than...)
Good looking out. At the moment all my working mts are built without the use of any indicators. Only order management and MM. Hence, it is not difficult to conclude that I have tried all sorts of tricks and order combinations hundreds of times with different profit / stop ratios and various lots. Nets, averages (shares), rollovers - it's all mine, but there is no place for lots in all this.
Good answer.
What good answer did he give? I can't even quote him on it. Are you lockers conspiring for fuck's sake? ))))
You're spouting some baseless nonsense without supporting it with a single mathematical example and still cheering each other on afterwards)))).
I can't get enough of you:))))
Yeah...
That would be in the words of VV Mayakovsky:
Do you want the LOCs?
I'm on it... !
:))))))))))))))))
Right?
Yeah...
That would be in the words of VV Mayakovsky:
Do you want the LOCs?
I'm on them... !
:))))))))))))))))
right?
Mayakovsky, is he the one who was pulling something out of his pants?)... no, I'm not familiar with his work:)
I know one thing for sure - you'll have your locks till you faint ... well, at least the next year for sure (I think this time will be enough to earn your miles ... as 001 said in the beginning of the topic - "no risk of loss":)))
В связи с реализацией требований NFA Compliance Rule 2–43(b) выпущены обновления терминалов MetaTrader 4:
— MetaTrader 4 Client Terminal build 225
— MetaTrader 4 MultiTerminal build 219
— MetaTrader 4 Mobile build 225
— MetaTrader 4 Mobile SE build 216
For MK it would be logical to take statistics for their clients (more than 300 DCs/brokers/banks) and estimate how many of them have taken the opportunity to disable the use of counter positions (locks/hedges/"progress"). There are very few of them, even taking into account the pressure of the NFA. I.e. most do not need such "progress".
------
MKs made MT5 to replace MT4, so they will exist in parallel only for a certain (transitional) period. They will voluntarily-forcibly move everyone to MT5.
What's the interest, on forex? Usually the opposite happens (look at stages of MT development).
It's not my reaction that's bad (question from page 13) - life is not hasty.))) Also - don't confuse temperament with hustle.))
Durkuya, you could have said you were interested in loci. That, of course, is not the case. What interested me was MT's initial focus on trading automation. In other words, it has nothing to do with forex - it has nothing to do with the platform.
And of course I've tried lots under different types. For a long time (in relation to my Forex history, of course) I considered them and experimented with their use. As a result I've come to the conclusion I've come to - which you know is dryness (I'm sorry, but I can't think of a more accurate term). Naturally, I'm aware of the fact that my initial nettoyness helped me. It helped me to look at loci not from under the bench in the kitchen, but more broadly. Initial lockers, who generally have not seen / traded in a normal stock exchange, did not have this help. Moreover, if I didn't have strategies *netto, of course), I might have used locks myself - why not - sometimes it seems easier to implement with them. But, thank the stock market, I avoided that. That's the way it is.
And also, as I learned that they will make access to the real exchanges through MT, so generally rejoiced that he started working for MT. I like the ideology of MT as a platform for robots. With my hands, to be honest and between us, I'm still a player - the tempo fails me. Therefore, when I saw another (maybe the most convenient) opportunity for automation, I did not apply to work with it.