The most banal trading strategy - 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
And I'm not proving anything to anyone, nor do I intend to.
If only you had at least a small brain.
Your level of intelligence is similar to what this "+" demonstrates...
The best way to show that someone is wrong is to make a signal on this system and everything will become clear who is right who is wrong.
Well let's just say it is. What was the point of starting this conversation... to find out who has what brain... yeah
The best way to show that someone is wrong is to make a signal on this system and everything will become clear who is right and who is wrong.
What signal are you talking about? I didn't intend to broadcast any signal to anyone. It was originally about the possibility of a ring with a positive swap. People were surprised. I explained how you can make a ring of any number of pairs if you know how to build a ring of three pairs forming a triangle. Such rings, even of dozens of pairs, are incredibly numerous. Among that number there are some which have a positive total swap. This is a fact. Finding such rings is everyone's business. The question is to learn how to construct a simple ring, of three pairs per triangle. People have started writing crap on the subject of such a ring. I wrote an equation for this ring using EURUSD, GBPUSD, EURGBP triangle as an example. I have already described everything in details, except for one coefficient that defines GBPUSD lot volume. If no one is willing to perform a couple of simple actions with a pencil on a piece of paper, and calculate this coefficient (Y in my notation), and thus understand how a triangle ring is built, and obtain the possibility of building arbitrary rings of any (large) number of pairs - what complaints to me? None. So leave your "mdya-ya" for your colleagues in the mind. But people who were following the discussion may have already started to build big rings and look for ones which have a positive swap total among them. Another thing is that, firstly, it turns out to require a brain with an idea of at least high school general education (and it's not my fault), and secondly, the profitability will clearly be small, so it's up to everyone to decide whether to trade this way (sit in a ring for months and years) or not to trade.
If you had even a small brain, you would realise that in the expression Z*Volume*delta(EURGBP), where Volume is the volume of the lot (position), equal to one in my equation, and delta(EURGBP) is the EURGBP price change, The multiplication of delta(EURGBP) by Z = GBPUSD is automatic, since the result of EURGBP price change is expressed in GBP pips (more expensive than USD pips), and its conversion into USD pips only requires (mental) multiplication by GBPUSD. However, not only are you incapable of getting to this yourself, you refuse to even read this, already written repeatedly by me above. Instead, when you hear the bell and don't understand what it's all about, you fantasize about some lot changes...
Lot sizes are, as I've written above, two ratios: X and Y (EURGBP lot size is 1), so the result of a EURUSD and GBPUSD trade is always equal in value and opposite in sign to a EURGBP trade, i.e., the product of GBPUSD*1*delta(EURGBP), if the result of this trade is expressed in USD pips.
Your level of intelligence is similar to what this "+" demonstrates...
P.S. Let us remind once again the equation for those readers of this thread, who have a brain: GBPUSD*1*delta(EURGBP) = X*delta(EURUSD) - Y*delta(GBPUSD) (here we will clearly write the unit, which has the sense of EURGBP lot size, for those, who cannot immediately understand that it can be omitted).
P.P.S. I will make another regal gift: I will inform that X = 1. That is the ring has the following form: GBPUSD*1*delta(EURGBP) = 1*delta(EURUSD) - Y*delta(GBPUSD) and only one coefficient (volume of lots) needs to be found to form it: coefficients (volumes of lots) on EURGBP and EURUSD are already known, they are equal to one.
Stop with your physical and mathematical nonsense.
I'm not interested in your calculations and your theories.
You claimed to be a cool trader because you easily make rings with a positive swap.
I have absolutely no interest in how you do the calculations. I'm not interested in your fourth-grade maths skills.
If you can build such a ring, then kudos to you!
Show me the ring, why are you talking and insulting everyone!
So save your "mdyaah" for your colleagues in the mind. Another thing is that, firstly, it turns out to require a brain
Do you have at least the minimum brain capacity not to be rude to people? Or are your colleagues in the zoo?
i missed something:
Is the duel set yet ? or is it not the 18th century and the disputants are just spitting over the fence ?
Write 3 simple EAs already, a benchmark that trades 1 lot on EURGBP and each a different variant of cross emulation.
Whose variant diverges more from the benchmark - he's a loser :-)
REPEAT
and I see there's a lot of warfare going on...
so settle this like gentlemen.
I (and many others here) will be interested in the course of the duel. And listening to the mutual personal assessments of the disputants is somehow not
However, in order to be able to make correct decisions about buying or selling commodities, including currency or shares, at the current moment in time, one must be able to foresee and predict with a sufficient degree of accuracy the behaviour of the market price in the future....
I will express my humble IMHO.
Price is an area of chaos that cannot be predicted over any extended period of time.
Conclusion 1 - it (the price) should not be predicted.
At the same time, simple algorithms have a certain derivative of the price - the balance line, which in turn depends on the algorithm parameters and the market condition itself. The line goes up when the parameters correspond to the market, and goes down when they do not.
Conclusion 2 - you should try to predict the behavior of the balance line, because you have tools to influence it by changing its parameters.
I will express my humble IMHO.
Price is an area of chaos that cannot be predicted over any extended period of time.
Conclusion 1 - it (the price) should not be predicted.
At the same time, simple algorithms have a certain derivative of the price - the balance line, which in turn depends on the algorithm parameters and the market condition itself. The line goes up when the parameters correspond to the market, and goes down when they do not.
Conclusion 2 - you should try to predict the behavior of the balance line, as you have tools to influence it by changing its parameters.
some abstract PRICE, of course, cannot be predicted.
But here in forex, price is a known-what price and it's not just predictable, it's largely regulated.
Moreover, exchange rates are much more strongly and obviously correlated than, say, stocks.
Boris Gulikov:
You claimed you're a cool trader.
Я? I never made such a claim. Don't broadcast your fantasies on me. I mean, I may not be a bad trader, but I have never said so here.
As for the ring with a positive swap - you don't need to be a good trader, you just need to know how to calculate the price movement, and the profitability in the end will be very small.
Boris Gulikov:
Give me the ring, why are you talking and insulting everyone!
Your hysteria is amusing :-) Thank you.
Do you have at least a brain for not being rude to people? Or your colleagues in a zoo?
Look in the mirror.
I've looked since this morning and you probably haven't.
A certain abstract PRICE, of course, cannot be predicted.
But here, in forex, the price is a known-what price and it is not just predictable, it is largely regulated.
Even if you know what the price is, and even if it is regulated (not by you, of course), what practical sense do you derive from this knowledge?
You cannot influence it in any way.