Points VS Pips
The eternal problem with the definition of pip, pipsqueak, minipipoint......
The definition is
1 пункт - это минимально доступное изменение цены на 1 десятитысячную (0,0001) при четырёхзначных котировках и на 1 сотую (0,01) при двухзначных котировках.
1 пипс - это минимально доступное изменение цены на 1 стотысячную (0,00001) при пятизначных котировках и на 1 тысячную (0,001) при трёхзначных котировках.
Исходя из определения пунктов и пипсов следует, что один пункт состоит из десяти пипсов.
This has always been the case with those in the know... I remember this definition from 2006 and you can find it on many internet resources now... Anything else is the nonsense of "trending gurus" ....
The broker can determine the size of the point at his discretion, especially now and for stocks, indices, and futures. Thus, the symbol point defined by the broker is the only relevant variable for the calculation.
Everyone can define what they want as a point! I define for myself (and calculate this for any symbol!) 1 point ~ $10.00 (or €) - but this is my strictly individual definition of a point!
The broker can define the size of the point as he wants, especially now also for stocks, indices, futures. Thus, the point of a symbol defined by the broker is the only relevant variable for the calculations.
Anyone can define what he wants as a pip! I define for myself (and calculate it for whatever symbol!) 1 pip ~ $10.00 (or €) - but this is my purely individual definition of the pip!
Definition
1 пункт - это минимально доступное изменение цены на 1 десятитысячную (0,0001) при четырёхзначных котировках и на 1 сотую (0,01) при двухзначных котировках.
1 пипс - это минимально доступное изменение цены на 1 стотысячную (0,00001) при пятизначных котировках и на 1 тысячную (0,001) при трёхзначных котировках.
Исходя из определения пунктов и пипсов следует, что один пункт состоит из десяти пипсов.
This has always been the definition of those in the know... I remember this definition from 2006 and you can find it on many internet resources now... Anything else is the nonsense of "trending gurus" ....
There has never been any such thing. There is no concept of "pips" in the terminal, nor in exchanges and DTs, nor any other jargon from homegrown experts.
There is only one point - the minimal possible price change. Full stop.
Minimal change of an indicator, when there is no more minor changes for this indicator. One point corresponds to a single change in the most recent published indicator figure. Points measure the fluctuation of prices, quotations of securities and currencies on exchanges.
And this is Point(). How much the price changes is specified in the value of this point.
This is not a rule, but it is a rule of thumb, as it is a rule of thumb of the stock market. When the value of one point suddenly becomes 0.000001, what else will they come up with? Micrick?
Vladimir, please don't be like that.
There has never been any such thing. There is no "pip" or "pips" in the terminal, nor any other jargon from homegrown experts.
There is only one point - the minimal possible price change. Point.
And it is Point(). The value of this point shows by how much the price changes.
The same reasoning can be applied to the calculation of price for each pip: the difference in the values of points and points with a fixed distance to each other. When the value of one point suddenly becomes 0.000001, what else will they come up with? Micrick?
Vladimir, don't be like that please.
Artem, and how then to explain that the fifth sign after a comma, in the price of the tool in the size less than all others?
Of course I support not making up new definitions, but it's always been considered the fourth/second decimal point. And then they introduced a fifth/third digit to measure the value of an asset more accurately. From the point of view of programming and language instructions\documentation, there is no objection _Point is nothing but 0.00001 at the moment, but from the point of view of a trader...
And remember how long ago you had to write the definition and conversion of points according to the quotations of the DC. It must have been about five years ago.
Artyom, previously a point in forex was the smallest possible change, but then the banks needed an extra decimal point to create savings with their arbitrage trading (buying in Frankfurt and selling in London at the same time). That's why the pip has 10 points and some traders are still familiar with it.
Artyom, previously a pip was in Forex the smallest possible change but then the banks required an additional decimal to create save earnings with their arbitrage trading (buying in Frankfurt and selling in London at the very same moment). That's why a pip has 10 points and some traders are still familiar with it.
Artyom, then how do you explain that the fifth decimal point in the price of an instrument is smaller than all the others?
Of course I support the idea of not making up new definitions, but it was always considered to be the fourth/second decimal place. And then they introduced a fifth/third digit to measure the value of an asset more accurately. From the point of view of programming and language instructions\documentation, there is no objection _Point is nothing but 0.00001 at the moment, but from the point of view of a trader...
And remember how long ago you had to write the definition and conversion of points according to quotes of the DC. About five years ago, I think.
1. For those who cannot understand that a pip has not become a pip because of the increase of its accuracy, and continues to believe that four-digit quotes are the head. We made it so that at least visually they were used to it. So to speak, a "friendly step" with regard to the immature minds that have just left their desks for the summer. IMHO of course. Maybe that's not what they meant by the distinction. But there is no "small point", there is only Point()...
2. And that's again for the same ones. And how they, with an accuracy of ten times less than possible, missed the signals because they did not reach one tenth of a "RIGHT POINT" and not ANYTHING strange too small ... There was a customer like that too. Kept trying to blame me for operating on clauses and not RIGHT clauses ... and his EA was not reacting to the price. After that I started to totally dislike homegrown experts, with their smarty-pants and other "smart-looking" notions, which they then confuse themselves with smart theories. This is childish.
Artyom, previously a point in forex was the smallest possible change, but then the banks needed an extra decimal point to create savings with their arbitrage trading (buying in Frankfurt and selling in London at the same time). That's why the pip has 10 points and some traders are still familiar with it.
Artyom, previously a pip was in Forex the smallest possible change but then the banks required an additional decimal to create save earnings with their arbitrage trading (buying in Frankfurt and selling in London at the very same moment). That's why a pip has 10 points and some traders are still familiar with it.
It makes no difference. A point has not ceased to be a pip - the minimum unit of an asset's value - because of the change in quoting precision.
Inflatable rubber balloon is inflated - its volume is big, balloon is deflated - its volume is small. But the inflatable rubber ball has not ceased to be an inflatable rubber ball as a result of these manipulations.
Why then does the item have the property of changing its name? Maybe it's just a mess in the head?
1. For those who can't understand that a pip didn't become a pip because of its increased accuracy, and continue to believe that four-digit quotes are the head of everything. We made it so that at least visually they were used to it. So to speak, it was a "friendly step" with respect to the immature minds that have just left their desks for the summer. IMHO of course. Maybe that's not what they meant by the distinction. But there is no "little point", there is only Point() ...
2. And that's again for the same ones. And how they, with an accuracy of ten times less than possible, missed the signals because they did not reach one tenth of a "RIGHT POINT" and not ANYTHING strange too small ... There was a customer like that too. Kept trying to blame me for operating on clauses and not RIGHT clauses ... and his EA was not reacting to the price. After that I started to totally dislike homegrown experts, with their smarty-pants and other "smart-looking" notions, which they then confuse themselves with smart theories. This is childish.
Then how do you explain that
children having fun, too?
Then how do you explain that
children having fun too?
Where does it say points/pips?
I'm not talking about the value of quotes, I'm talking about made-up names.
You don't seem to know what I'm talking about. All right, then.
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use