Once again, about the lokas. - page 28
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
I personally recalculated a similar or similar (i.e. with similar principle of placing locking orders) example several times in public at the request of lock supporters, by the way, I am not the only one who did it. Search the threads - I'm bored.
If the brokerage company does not take an additional spread, if it does, the profit from a loss on this amount is less profitable than the profit from a stop. If the position is held for a few days then the lock is even less profitable.
Ok. But it's not a question of whether it makes a difference whether to lock or close. I'm more interested in whether this logic is viable at all?
s.s. I can program an EA using this logic, but I'm not sure if the time will be well spent... I don't want to reinvent the wheel.
Gentlemen, if this topic comes up, I want to hear your feedback on one tactic... I'll give it below.
I've already drawn it somewhere:
The black one is the locks option, the red one is the netting option. Spread losses are not taken into account.
This strategy indirectly confirms the conclusion that a dangerous buying procedure is better considered with locking options, in particular as suggested here.
The buying procedure is very dangerous only on a downtrend. As, indeed, is the selling procedure on an uptrend. All the rest time they are equally dangerous:) .....
I would only leave the latter.
I've already given a drawing like this somewhere:
Black is the locks option, red is the netting option. Spread losses are not taken into account.
That's just it, the loki's are worse:
1. Spread;
2. By Swap; 2;
3. Collateral.
Again, I'm not interested in what is better (lock or netting - that's clear), but the system itself - is it worth mechanising... maybe someone has already done it?
That's just it, the locks are worse:
1. Spread;
2. Swap;
3. Collateral.
Cross out the 1st and 3rd point right away.
Why on earth would you do that?
1 - When a locking order is opened, the spread (or commission) is paid. When closing the position (in case of netting) - no.
3. When locking, the deposit for the opened orders is frozen, and the deposit is deadweighted; when closing the position (in case of netting), the deposit is equal to 0.
I'm out ..... Yusufkhoja, expecting you to be unable to use a calculator is the height of cynicism, especially considering the article you posted on this forum. Pull yourself together and use a search engine and a calculator - you do trust mathematical estimations, this topic has been discussed and recalculated many times.
The disadvantage is that in some brokerage companies the trader will pay extra spread and swaps for nothing. There are no advantages.
yosuf:
The conclusion is that it is better not to buy at all!
The conclusion is wrong.
I read somewhere that in order to develop a symmetrical perception of the market, traders are suggested to mark entry/exit points on the chart, then the chart is flipped 180 degrees (so that the up-trend becomes a down-trend) and again mark entry/exit points on the flipped chart. If they coincide, it is OK. Conclusion: (VladilavVG has already done it) both buying and selling are equally dangerous if you don't know where the price will go after them.
There is no point in arguing about lots, John Catala must have invented them.
Why would I do that?
1 - when opening a locking order, the spread (or commission) is paid. When closing the position (in case of netting) - no.
3. When locking, the deposit for the opened orders is frozen, and the deposit is frozen; when closing the position (in case of netting), the deposit is equal to 0.
1. The spread is not a commission. It is not paid on opening.
. One pair of buy/sell orders - 1 spread. whether there is a lock or not.
3. if you are concerned about the margin - nothing will help.
The conclusion is wrong.
I read somewhere that in order to develop a symmetrical view of the market, traders are suggested to mark entry/exit points on the chart, then flip the chart 180 degrees (so that the up-trend becomes a down-trend) and mark entry/exit points on the flipped chart again. If they coincide, it is OK. Conclusion: (VladilavVG has already done it) both buying and selling are equally dangerous if you do not know where the price will go after it.