Do you have any tactics for dealing with the loca? - page 11
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
Timbo, I'll text you in a private message, OK? Do you read it?
Without your advice, I'm afraid I won't be able to cope with the conversion to netting. The problem is really serious, I'm not kidding.
P.S. I'm not texting you in person, I'm emailing you.
Are you trying to say that few (and thus less than 10) lines in condition for opening orders is not enough to make the EA profitable? Or do you mean a few lines for the whole EA?
a few means more than 2-3 ))
Profitability does not mean efficiency, profitability is where it is in the plus, but the stability and profitability of the machine is usually a very modest plus in funds.
And the high profitability - the usual quality of unstable automat.sistemy that loses all meaning because eventually looms plummet.
Regarding the loops: the tray is still different from a stop, just as a drawdown is different from a stop, from Breakeven, or even from a profit.
A stop is an incurred loss, a loss of funds.
Lock is a fixed drawdown, with the possibility of waiting for the reversal, but still be able to earn on the drawdown. And you can always close it like a stop loss, minus swaps of course.
I think everything depends on the strategy. I think the lock is applicable to the reversal strategy when the reversal is "postponed" but very probable.
to FION, Mathemat, timbo, api
For example, I need to open like this: red lines are short positions, blue ones are long. All positions shown in the picture are profitable. On a non-trading platform the profit, if it remains, will be very low, almost zero, because the positions will be mutually destroyed. I need them all to be separate. This is why this TS cannot be changed to netting. But it's impossible to work in such a way with locks' prohibition.
As you see - it's not about locks at all, I've got opposite poses not for what I've set locks for - this is what I call a cloud of solutions. Each decision is completely independent and without regard to decisions already made.
to FION, Mathemat, timbo, api
For example, I need to open like this: red lines are short positions, blue ones are long. All positions shown in the picture are profitable. On a non-trading platform the profit, if it remains, when trading this way will be very low, almost zero, because the positions will be mutually destructive.
We need to open a blue position - we have closed part of the red one, we need to fix the blue one, we have to open the red one again by the volume that we closed in the red one at the opening of the blue one. In addition, you do not pay extra spread. The profit is greater by the amount of spreads saved in this way.
Yes, I realise that with the common understanding of locs, what I said is difficult to understand.
At first, after this post by Matemat:
It's not that simple with loco. I'm more of a locophobe than a locophile myself. I used to be...
However... a proper trader should be unprincipled (not counting baonic trading principles, I guess). So it turns out that lately my aversion to locks in bots - yes, exactly in bots, not manual trading! - Is undergoing severe verification. And there are very good reasons for this, but for now - know-how. I don't know how to organise trading with this robot without a loc.
P.S. Briefly, in a nutshell, it's stat. arb. on one instrument. That's how it's written, that's how it should be understood, I didn't make a typo.
And the lock is broken automatically (bot!) - after you reach a certain condition. But you have to enter it properly beforehand :)I thought that Matemat's TS uses some techniques similar to mine. But I realized my mistake when reading this post:
Yes, with MT5 I will have to think about how to modify it. Netting needs to be properly calculated. You could, of course, make two different accounts on netting and split trades, but I'd like it all on one.
And this post:
timbo, I'll write you in a private message, OK? Are you reading it?
Without your advice, I'm afraid I can't cope with the netting conversion. The problem is really serious, I'm not kidding.
to FION, Mathemat, timbo, api
For example, I need to open like this: red lines are short positions, blue ones are long. All positions shown in the picture are profitable. On a non-trading platform the profit, if it remains, will be very low, almost zero, because the positions will be mutually destroyed. I need them all to be separate. This is why this TS cannot be changed to netting. But it's impossible to work in such a way with locks' prohibition.
As you see - it's not about locks at all, I've got opposite poses not for what I've set locks for - this is what I call a cloud of solutions. Each decision is completely independent and without regard to decisions already made.
Is this a joke or a provocation?
Is this a joke or a provocation?
A pretty competent trade in my opinion.
Licking the market for all it's worth.
joo has a point, in my opinion.
On the subject of similar "gridiron-probabilistic" tactics, I'll allow myself a few pictures from the same thread. ;)
have decided to partially curtail -
We buy up everything...
And if the price, within the current volatility, goes back to 1,219 - it will be even very good ...
Imho.
Is this a joke or a provocation?
No, it's not a joke.
Swetten:
Seems like a pretty competent trade to me.
Licking the market for all it's worth.
joo has a point, in my opinion.
Clever girl, Svetlana. The point is exactly this - to cover as much information flow as possible (for us traders - quotes). But this is a side effect of TC unexpectedly positive, when I started projecting, I did not think about it.