Is there proof of profit from using Autotrading? - page 18
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'll show you the work of my Ratchet as well. It works only on the plus side, no backsliding). For this it is enough 2 steps of the lot.
That's what you all say, you want a quick and immediate profit, you want to make a million from 1000$ and without drawdowns and with low risk. Your profit in this case depends on the size of your initial deposit and the percentage of risk. The higher the risk, the bigger the profit. If you want less risk and more profit, increase your deposit.
Here is a picture, number of trades is the same but initial deposit is 10 000$ and risk is 20%.
:)
Here is the same Expert Advisor with the same initial conditions but with a slightly different opening algorithm. We have prohibitive volumes at the end and we cannot increase them further.
Net profit 4 348 860 102.23
Examples have been presented. So why is there no theory for making profit on forex yet?
Examples have been presented. So why hasn't the theory for forex profits been derived yet?
Those who make a profit, they do not need any theory. Those who take a loss try to fit it into a theory. There's a saying, "Money likes silence". That means, earn money and stay quiet. :)
Forex does not produce any output and there is no extra money to come from. For example there is $1KK in the market at the moment. In each transaction there is a buyer and a seller. If the price goes up, the buyers make a profit, and the seller loses money. If the price goes down, it is vice versa. But the money in the market didn't become larger, as it was 1KKK and still is, it just flows from one pocket to another. Therefore, to make a profit, you have to make a loss.
Those who make profit, they don't need any theory. It's those who are losing money who try to explain it by a theory. There's a saying, "Money likes quiet." It means you make money and sit back and don't show off. :)
Forex does not produce any output and there is no extra money to come from. For example, there is $1KK in the market at the moment. In each transaction there is a buyer and a seller. If the price goes up, the buyers make a profit and the seller loses money. If the price goes down, it is vice versa. But the money in the market didn't become larger, as it was 1KKK and still is, it just flows from one pocket to another. Therefore, someone should take profit and someone should lose.
But it's possible to derive some kind of pattern, isn't it?
For example:
But it is possible to draw some patterns.
For example:
You can, you can come up with whatever you want, you can find a lot of patterns on any chart, but this pattern is historical (you see it after the fact) and it is not certain that this pattern will continue to occur in the future. As for brokers, I would not say that they interfere with a trader that is constantly earning. You should not trade on the kitchen accounts, with such accounts you trade against the forex broker, i.e. the counteragent of your deals is the broker and he profits from your losses. If a broker takes your transactions to the interbank for another counterparty, the broker has no reason to put a spoke in your wheels, its only benefit is commission and spread. The difference between the two types of orders is that you do not buy them if you do not want them to catch you, you must buy them if you do not want them to catch you, you mustn't. This depends on your TS. If the system includes a stop loss, it must be set exactly where your trading system requires it. If you are constantly sitting in front of the monitor and the connection with the server is reliable, you can close the deal and use your hands.
Those who make a profit don't need any theory. Those who are losing money are the ones who are trying to fit it into a theory. There's a saying, "Money likes quiet". It means you make money and don't show off. :)
Forex does not produce any output and there is no extra money to come from. For example, there is $1KK in the market at the moment. In each transaction there is a buyer and a seller. If the price goes up, the buyers make a profit and the seller loses money. If the price goes down, it is vice versa. But the money in the market didn't become larger, as it was 1KKK and still is, it just flows from one pocket to another. As for profit, someone should have it and someone should lose.
Wrong. The printing presses work non-stop, increasing the mass of money and decreasing its unit value. And forex is just a tool for redistribution. To do it competently, you need a theoretical justification, so to speak, based on the goals, objectives and needs of the moment.
Are there really blind men who believe that everything in the money world happens by chance and by itself?
....
Are there still blind people here who believe that everything in the world of money happens by chance and by itself?
I don't think everything happens by chance. Everything can be justified, through cause and effect.
And forex is just a tool for redistribution. In order to do it properly, you need a theoretical justification, so to speak, based on the goals, objectives and needs of the moment.
In order to do this properly, you need a theoretical basis, in other words, based on the goals, objectives and needs of the current moment.
There must be a foundation on which all this (forex profits) is built, perhaps it's more primitive than is commonly believed.
There is no theory, if you are earning now it does not mean that you will earn the same in the future.
There is no theory, if you are earning now it does not mean that you will earn the same in the future.
But then all the capital should have been evenly distributed among the participants. Look at the land, why is the land that colour? Because everything is displaced, without any specific impact. And if you look at the beach, you can already see the difference. After all, water affects the land and changes it.
I don't think everything happens by chance.
That's good. But the phrase is incomplete. And it implies the presence of determinism and goal-seeking. That's the right way to put it.
Everything can be substantiated, through cause-effect relationships.
In other words, develop a theory.