Is it possible to implement a RELIABLE accounting of the aggregate position structure in MT5? - page 25
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
As expected - there is no justification.
There is an inadequate mental reaction.
And then: Where did I write that "unprofitable"?
So they are not unprofitable? So why do you forbid their use? (approaches)
... The advisor looks at the whole thing, at the market, and makes a decision. What the fuck does history have to do with it?!?!? ...
I'm not going to talk about communication style now...
I'll just ask a question: Do you know the construction
Y[n]=a1*Y[n-1]+a2*Y[n-2]+a3*Y[n-3]+a4*Y[n-4]+b0*X[n]+b1*X[n-1]+b2*X[n-2]+b3*X[n-3]+...
So they are not unprofitable? So why do you forbid their use? (approaches).
Where did I write that I forbid it? >> Did you do it on purpose? ))) After all, it's not the first time - have a basic regard for the words of the person from whom you are expecting an answer.
Moreover, as soon as this topic came up, I suggested various ways of accounting for the story. Although I personally do not give a shit about it. I also get insulted when I try to explain.
What is it about my explanation that doesn't suit you on the merits (not in style - sorry, I couldn't resist)?
I don't know how else to explain it to you. Understand that a trading decision must depend on the market, on the account, on the contents of the deposit, but nothing else. Otherwise it is simply not a trading decision. It will not necessarily be loss-making. But it will be anything but trading for profit. The purpose in this case is to maintain the initial self-looping logic of the Expert Advisor. And it must be locked into the market.
Just a question: Do you know the following construction
Y[n]=a1*Y[n-1]+a2*Y[n-2]+a3*Y[n-3]+a4*Y[n-4]+b0*X[n]+b1*X[n-1]+b2*X[n-2]+b3*X[n-3]+...
If a & b are constants, such a "construction" is called a "linear combination" - want to talk about it ?
Good luck
If a & b are constants, such a "construction" is called a "linear combination" - want to talk about that ?
Good luck
>>) this is only part of the answer.
I have written many times: Expert Advisors that make transaction decisions based on their history, logically, purposely, and in plain common sense, are wrong. The decision to make a transaction should be based on what you have in your account, in your depo and on the market situation. But not on what you have had in the past! Once again, this is flawed logic that has NOTHING to do with the PURPOSE of trading.
I support almost everything.
Almost because with clarification, the EA should always look at the market,
and only then should it check this decision with the current balance/equity history.
The balance/equity history is only necessary for debugging/development of the system, but not for its functioning.
(why? has already been proven, I won't repeat it).
I'm not going to talk about communication style now...
I just have a question: Do you know the following construction
Y[n]=a1*Y[n-1]+a2*Y[n-2]+a3*Y[n-3]+a4*Y[n-4]+b0*X[n]+b1*X[n-1]+b2*X[n-2]+b3*X[n-3]+...
))) I understood your (I wanted to write "I can see a mile ahead of you", but then I remembered that we are not in the Ministry of Culture) move.
I'm not going to talk about quality of thinking here (read Blaise Pascal - he said it better), but just to say: you are confusing the logic of decision making by the market (by the history of quotes), with the logic of decision making by the expert's inner workings. To do auto-optimization, calculate weights for neuro, etc., etc., he does not need to drain the deposit - a back-test at any point in time is enough. It doesn't matter if it was working before or not.
Understand that a trading decision must depend on the market, the account, the contents of the depo, but nothing else. Otherwise it is simply not a trading decision. It will not necessarily be loss-making. But it will be anything but trading for profit. The purpose in this case is to maintain the initial self-looping logic of the Expert Advisor. And it - the Expert Advisor - must be locked into the market.
And the proof? Why is it NOT a trading solution?
You've trapped yourself in a logic trap. Trying to prove your point with unsubstantiated assertions, while dismissing any of the others' points of view without any consideration.
At the very least, this is arrogance - the very thing you accuse the Lokers of. Like they don't know how to think differently and their brains are jammed. Look at yourself. Or ask someone from the outside to consider your position.
And he - the advisor - has to be fixated on the market.
There is such a thing as a mechanical TS. This is when the market doesn't matter where it goes, and the Expert Advisor earns money. Have you ever encountered it? )))))
I work with them. Not everything is rosy, but it is very close to it.