Regularity or Randomness - page 23
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 what prevents us from defining both correctly, and making Profits without losses from one and the other!
My point is that flat = trend. There are no Majesties.
Only trying to make money in a flat, we still sometimes have positive slippage, while trading in a trend we have negative slippage.
And what prevents us from properly Defining and Determining both, and making Profits without allowing Losses from one and the other!
Such things are easy to identify later, on history.
And then there are all sorts of divisive flips.
And then there's the flop that's trending and you're going to get...
and it's gonna keep on going and going...
And you'll be sitting there thinking, "That's annoying!"
And if you're already in position, your palms are sweaty and your back's wet.
And what prevents us from correctly Defining and Determining both, and making Profits without allowing Losses from one and the other!
My point is that flat = trend. There are no Majesties.
Only trying to make money in a flat, we still have positive slippage sometimes, while trading on the trend we have negative slippage.
To start and/or continue the discussion about trend and flat, try to calculate and compare the potential and actual profitability of forex transactions today.
In Russian, what do you want to count?)
You don't need to count anything to understand that trend = flat. Run a simple EA that will open a trade with equal TP and SL. It will lose on the spread. Without the spread, it will hang around zero.
If we change the TP upwards, there will be equity skews in the trends, but it will still lose on the spread.
If we shift the TP downwards, equity will be skewed on the flat, but we will lose again on the spread.
What is there to calculate?
There is a mathematical absence but there is a practical presence. Determining the beginning and the end of a trend and a flat is quite simple.
Yes, on the history, but in real time it is very difficult to understand when a trend is over, and it cannot be solved by simple methods.
When I say that there are no fluxes, I mean that even fluxes consist of trends at a lower level and large trends are fluxes at an even higher level.
Yes, on the history, but in real time it is very difficult to understand when a trend is over, and it cannot be solved by simple methods.
When I say that there are no fluxes, I mean that even the fluxes consist of trends of a lower level and large trends are fluxes of an even higher level.
This is called demagogy. :)
There are both flutes and trends. Just in hindsight.
It's called demagoguery. :)
There are both flotsam and trends. Just in hindsight.
It's not exactly demagogy. Understanding what a trend or a flat is is very important for profitable trading. Most people give an abstract definition to these concepts, in fact they themselves do not know what is the difference between trend and flat. So, at the very beginning of your journey you have to understand what trends and flotsam are. There are not many people who write and speak about it, because not many people understand what a trend and a flat are actually, you have to do it yourself. So why do everything yourself if someone has understood and defined it...
In Russian, what do you want to count?)
You don't need to count anything to understand that trend = flat. Run a simple EA that will open a trade with equal TP and SL. It will lose on the spread. Without the spread, it will hang around zero.
If we change the TP upwards, there will be equity skews in the trends, but it will still lose on the spread.
If we shift the TP downwards, equity will be skewed on the flat, but we will lose again on the spread.
What is there to count?)) ppms
You can also do it in Russian, as it is your mother tongue. You can tell the story and show it to them and provide them with the necessary materials.