Optimal values of SL and TP orders for an arbitrary TS. - page 4
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
Сначала определяемся с SL, расчитываем объем от выбранного SL, затем только думаем о ТР. По моему, только так и нуно.
Maybe. I've just never gone from SL to TP, always the other way around. I just thought why not to do it that way, so I wrote it down. But taking into account that they are unequivocally connected SL<->TP, so it follows, that one must build one's strategy not on TP, but on SL :o) Hmmm, probably it has a right to life, to determine not where the price will go, but where it won't. By the way, sometimes it is easier to do the second one, especially with elliotics. :о)
Hmmm, and this is probably the right thing to do, to determine not where the price will go, but where it won't go.
And if it does go, you have to admit your mistake and stop trading... Sometimes I trade arms in this way, from levels to the inside, I can place very short stops, which I won't mind losing.
I will be simple and brief:
1) You can't use fixed stops in trading, and you can't calculate SL depending on TP, and vice versa. I.e. SL!=const, TP!=const, and TP!=k*SL, where 0<=k<=N (nat numbers).
2) When we enter, we should already know in advance at which prices we should close with profit/loss, if everything goes according to the forecast, otherwise the targets change. So the targets are dynamic. And they are not related to the opening price, so TP == 300 pips is out of the question. Close prices (targets) are the most probable reversal moments, hence we can conclude that the ideal TS will be a reversal one. But since there is no ideal TP, then we should somehow miraculously calculate the probability that in this particular trade we will reach this particular target. If the probability is "good" - then we enter, otherwise we wait.
3) SL is a signal to enter in the opposite direction (flip). You may use martin (if expected payoff is high).
In general, it all depends on the specific system.
I will be simple and brief :
.... that the ideal TS would be a coup de grâce .....
Absolutely agree that the ideal system should be coupable. I'd like to know the other two dozen properties
of an ideal system, because that's what we have to strive for.
Absolutely agree that the ideal system should be a coup. I'd like to know the other two dozen properties
of the ideal system, because that's what you have to strive for.
Firstly, the "perfect" system must be profitable.
Абсолютно согласен, что идеальная система должна быть переворотной. Хотелось бы знать и остальные 2 десятка свойств
идеальной системы, ведь это то, к чему надо стремиться.
The tumbling in random sections is far from indicative of a perfect system.The ideal system is Time Machine (:
and better than a rollover can only sometimes be a rollover, a rollover if the probability is greater than the given minimum, if not, but the probability is high enough then only Close.
Let's go! Let's take it slowly...
Let's start with algorithmization of the simplest arbitrary TS with reinvestment of capital f. Recall that in our case the capital fraction f is defined as a relative and dimensionless value of funds per point of price movement. Suppose at the initial time we had capital K[0] and as a result of the first transaction we have earned (lost) from the market h[1] points where h can take any natural values, i.e. h can be equal to 5 points (and we have won the bribe) or -51 points and we have lost (returned to the market) 51 points. Then the monetary gain of our capital as a result of the first transaction will be determined by K[1]=K[0]+h[1]*f*K[0], it can be both gain and loss of capital, everything is determined by the sign before h[1] and its absolute value. For the second transaction the expression looks similar to the one already written: K[2]=K[1]+h[2]*f*K[1]. Let me remind you that the fraction f of the capital involved in trading is fixed. In general, after i transactions our deposit size will be determined by K[i]= K[i-1]* (1+h[i]*f), considering that we have already got an expression for K[i-1] we can substitute it in the last formula and get K[i]= K[i-2]* (1+h[i-1]*f)* (1+h[i]*f). Continuing along the chain we get:
We've got the expression that shows the relative value of the increment of our deposit K[n] to its starting value K[n] through n transactions for an arbitrary TS that is determined by the value of its bribes h[i]. The symbol P stands for the product of brackets by each other. That's all for now. The point is that we cannot go further with expression for deposit growth presented in this form. But we can try a trick, in particular, recall the fact that values of point bribes h[i] are integers, and in case of large number of transactions we can always find groups of bribes with the same number of points in each bribe. Thus regroup the terms in the product into a "product of interest piles" and take advantage of the fact that by rearranging the terms in the product, the product does not change.
I'll continue later...
So far, so clear. I suspect exponents and something like a discrete point distribution of bribes will come out soon.