Is there a need for a lock in MT5? - page 3
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
Maybe it seems to you that it is the lock that is profitable?
You are not making any profit at the moment of opening multidirectional orders. The logic appears when you close these orders and you can do without lots, reducing the work of the EA.
You have to do it in case of a VERY big deposit, because you never know how far the price will go from the opening price :). Here it's practically all the same( despite YARGE reminders about swaps etc).
Reread it three times.
Forgive me, but I don't understand any of it.
How did the lock - two open positions, fit into one order of double volume?
Look at the report - all orders are closed in the plus. You should just remove half of the orders, and increase lot size of the other half.
Only if the deposit is VERY large, because no one knows how far the price will go from the opening price :). In other words, I can put my Expert Advisor on a HUNDRED of pairs with a deposit of 1k.
In other words, I can put my EA on HUNDREDS of pairs with 1k deposit. Does it mean anything to you?
Maybe it seems to you that it is the lock that does the most good?
The author himself doesn't seem to understand what the profit of this EA is.
Look at the report - all orders are closed in surplus. We simply remove half of the orders, and increase the lot size of the remaining half.
See above.
See above.
See above for yourself. One away from this post.
Only if the deposit is VERY large, because no one knows how far the price will go from the opening price :). Here it's all the same (despite the BRIEF reminders about swaps, etc.).
Well, then it's too bad, because your logic is rude at closing.
You have a lot of EAs that can show good and stable profit on a certain interval, and later they will ruthlessly lose them.
a good interval may be a good fit or just a fluke
In such an EA, you can add locks without changing the basic algorithm, and on the "good" segment it will show the same good result
but it's not the merit of lots
Later it will lose the profit even through no fault of loks.
logic is needed
The author himself doesn't seem to understand what the profit in this EA is coming from.
And a heated explanation of how the EA works will follow, just to prove his point :). They tell you. One of the main ideas of the Expert Advisor is the lock. We can do it the way you claim if the deposit is too big. But. Give me 100K and I will give you plenty of profitable Expert Advisors. It's a well-known fact.
And a heated explanation of the EA's work will follow, just to prove a point :). They tell you. One of the main ideas of the EA is the lock. You can do as you say with a very large deposit. But. Give me 100K and I will give you plenty of profitable Expert Advisors. That's a known fact.
You don't even analyse what you are told.
Boring
If you are a forex broker, it means that your logic is not very good at closing.
There are a lot of EAs in the base that, on a certain interval, will show you a good and stable profit, and later they mercilessly lose it.
a good interval may be a good fit or just a fluke
In such an EA, you can add locks without changing the basic algorithm, and on the "good" segment it will show the same good result
but it's not the merit of lots
it will fail later even through no fault of losing lots
logic is needed
Look at the second stack, it's over 10 years. And the logic is the same. The logic is in the locks and in the main property of the market.
The point in the thread is that someone needs the lock, under some conditions. Somebody doesn't need it, but somebody does.