Ring - page 40
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
many years ago
About 5 or 8 years ago I was looking at triangles/rings in the same way. I tried to create a synthetic with characteristics that would satisfy me.
In the end, I came to the conclusion that it was impossible.
Then I thought that while one currency would fall, others would fluctuate. I created multicurrency which traded against the trend. Everything was fine and it was growing for a couple of months. But then a strong trend happened (I don't remember the trend anymore) and the account went bust.
Anyway, good luck to those who are searching this dead-end road!
;)
Hundreds of mathematicians have been solving this problem for years, and a simple guy from St. Petersburg just picked it up!
So the word"impossible " is a blur.
What should have been created was not a synthetic, but a "dynamic" - a model of algorithm behaviour in the market that dynamically changes the synthetic depending on asset price movements.
This is sophistry. Blah, blah, blah.
I was doing specifics and you have a bare theory that you can't test because you're not a programmer and coders aren't exactly burning with enthusiasm.
What you don't put together, you just get Another tool but... with a bunch of pooled spreads. This instrument will either not fluctuate (if volumes are balanced) or it will both fluctuate and have trends. Technically it will be similar to currency pairs, but the spread fee will be higher.
@PapaYozh, find yourself in the picture.
I'm not in it.
Hundreds of mathematicians have been solving the problem for years, and a simple guy from St. Petersburg solved it!
So the word"impossible " is a blur.
First of all, the guy wasn't an ordinary guy, he was one of the mathematicians who had been solving that problem for years.
Secondly, did you go into the solution of that problem to claim "solved"?
The ring is a perfect synthetic with losses equal to profits. The different behaviour of the EA with both leads the account to a profit.
Open 2 differently directed positions on the same pair and you will get the same "losses equal profits" ;)
The conclusion of 1,000 people who have unsuccessfully tackled any complex problem that solving it is not possible can be crossed out if one person solves it. And therefore never say never).
What is the problem? The theory has been laid out here, anyone can practice coding and observe the behaviour of equity.
Open 2 differently directed positions on the same pair and you get the same "losses equal gains" ;)
You still don't get it, unfortunately...
Not "Open two differently directed positions", but "Cut losses and grow profits" - because that's one of the patterns of market behaviour.
If you don't want to use on more complex designs - whatever, open two multidirectional ones! And then add to the profitable ones and figure out what to do with the unprofitable ones, since you don't want to reopen them.
And anyway: why do you have to not just show the candy where it is, but press it into your mouth?You still don't get it, unfortunately...
Not "Open two multidirectional", but "Cut losses and grow profits" - because that's one of the patterns of market behaviour.
If you don't want to use on more complex designs - whatever, open two multidirectional ones! And then fund the profitable ones and figure out what to do with the unprofitable ones, since you don't want to over-open them.
And anyway: why do you have to not just show the candy where it is, but squeeze it into your mouth?I figured it out a long time ago. And what to cut and what to grow. I've even figured out when to cut и when to grow..
I was just sharing information so that the flock doesn't have too high expectations.
If you don't want to use on more complicated structures - whatever, open two multidirectional ones! And then add to the profitable ones and figure out what to do with the unprofitable ones, since you don't want to over-open them.
In my opinion, all that's left is to make them act at different intervals and come up with a system to compensate for the increasing negative volume.
In my opinion, what is left to do is to force them to act at different intervals and come up with a system to compensate for the growing negative volume.
Don't grow anything negative. Beneficial events need to be summed up, disadvantages need to be nipped in the bud.
Do not cultivate anything negative. Profitable events should be summed up, disadvantageous ones should be nipped in the bud.
"Can you make it so - chairs in the morning and money in the evening?
- Yes, we can. But money first!" : )
Got it, thank you.