How are you with a market mindset? - page 8
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
Yes. that's right) I don't succeed everywhere unfortunately...
Sometimes I have to close sessions manually...
Fortunately, it's not that hard to understand in time when my robot will have large drawdowns.
I have not seen any proof of your words) since everyone is the first, provide similar results)))
You can take a look here. I have laid a lot of similar tests on this forum if you look for them. And here is the last day last week from the real account:
You can have a look here. I've posted a lot of similar tests on the forum if you look for them. And here's the last day last week from a real account:
You prefer grid trading methods. And sooner or later you're going to lose out anyway. Or put a 10-13 year test).
Either you will have such a drawdown most likely due to the collapse in the crisis... that you'll stay in the drawdown forever, because the market won't give you a trend that will cover your losses.
A test on EURUSD from 2006 to 2012 would show the reliability of your methods...
Would you agree on that, you wouldn't put a deposit of 2-5 lakhs.Yes...you're right in fact the positive swap plays a huge role I also noticed that) Well, what if your orders do not close at profit and the drawdown covers most of your profit, what do you do?
I calculate stop-losses in such a way that if the drawdown reaches a critical level of 20% of the deposit and some positions are closed, the total drawdown of the remaining open positions will not exceed 5-10% of the trimmed balance again. In practice this has never happened yet, as I trade very cautiously and from such levels that have already been secured and have gone to correction.
I calculate stop-losses in a way that if total drawdown reaches 20% of a deposit and a part of positions is closed, the total drawdown of remaining open positions should not exceed 5-10% of the trimmed balance again. In practice it has never happened yet, because I trade very carefully and from the levels that have already been fixed and corrected.
How long have you been speculating?
What percentage of profit do you earn per year? If it's not a secret.You prefer grid trading methods. And sooner or later you are going to lose out anyway. Or set the test for 10-13 years).
Some day everyone will get divested, but some will not make it in time and will die rich. But seriously, the one who does not limit his losses is the one who plummets. I always limit my losses, you can see it in my real account.
If my real account drawdown exceeds the maximal drawdown of the test, I stop trading and either optimize or modify the TS.
As for 10-13 years and more I was going through it. I also believed that if the system passes the test for such a long period without losing losses this system will be stable on the real account. But once after 1.5 years of successful work the system, that showed stable results in the tester for 15 years, went into the deep drawdown. So now I do not believe in any fairy tales. Test results give no guarantees, not even 15 year results. And, if you spend a lot of time to achieve a stable operation of the TS in the tester over a very long period, this time is almost wasted. In addition, such stable performance in the tester over a long period is usually achieved with very low profitability.
For a universalist who thinks in terms of the quantum world, it's not very solid to present test results with such a low profitability and such a high maximum drawdown).
Profitability cannot be high. Otherwise, the risks are too high... above 200% profitability per year, the risk of withdrawal rises sharply. And this is simply unavoidable, because profits in the market are always proportional to losses.
My investors don't even trust my profitability. it's too much. usually the annual profit should be around 40-45% in order for it to make sense for a large capital.
Try to find a big investor with a profit of 200% or more... no one will believe you)
Guarantee and stability of results is what matters. You need to be absolutely sure that tomorrow you won't lose all of your money. Let's say 50% a year, but make it so that you are sure of profit, make it so that your test results are not random.
And you will be priceless, believe me.
You don't think that less than 0.1% make money on Forex somewhere because everyone else is stupid, do you?)
One day everyone will sell out, but some will not make it in time and will die rich. But seriously, the one who does not limit his losses is the one who plummets. I always limit my losses, you can see it in my real account.
If my real account drawdown exceeds the maximal drawdown of the test, I stop trading and either optimize or modify the TS.
As for 10-13 years and more I was going through it. I also believed that if the system passes the test for such a long period without losing losses this system will be stable on the real account. But once after 1.5 years of successful work the system, that showed stable results in the tester for 15 years, went into the deep drawdown. So now I do not believe in any fairy tales. Test results give no guarantees, not even 15 year results. And, if you spend a lot of time to achieve a stable operation of the TS in the tester over a very long period, this time is almost wasted. In addition, such a stable performance in the tester over a long period is usually achieved with very low profitability.
It all depends on the type of TS.
Not that the tester is wrong.
I spend no more than half an hour to optimize one instrument during 13 years.
I do not tune any more.
Of course ... averaging will never produce a stable result, and do you know why?
The loss tends to infinity times.
stabilising the probability of profit cannot be two.
the initial risks are unreasonable three.
and profits are constant and finite.
You see how even the spread affects trading and it's your favourite nets).
I'm not even talking about all the other risks...
It all depends entirely on the type of TC.
Not that the tester is wrong.
I spend no more than half an hour to optimise one instrument over a 13 year period.
I don't tune any more.
Of course ... averaging will never produce a stable result, and do you know why?
The loss tends to infinity times.
stabilising the probability of profit cannot be two.
the initial risks are unreasonable three.
and profits are constant and finite.
First, the probability of profit is infinite. second, the initial risks are not justified, while the profits are constant and finite. There are different averaging models and one cannot judge about all of them. In the TS I trade on the real account only one averaging order and a strict loss limitation. So the passion you're talking about has nothing to do with my system.)
There are different averaging orders and you cannot judge all of them by any one of them. In the TS I trade on the real, there is only one averaging order and strict loss limitation. So the passion you're talking about has nothing to do with my system.)