Experiment - page 27
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
In this particular case, the (allegedly significant) preponderance of losses is due to the small trading range (very small trades compared to the spread) and plus trends. The trend is a thing when the coin buy/sell 50/50
The average profit trade is 130 pips (4th sign), the average loss trade is 80 pips, the average holding time is 3 days. Thus, it is not a scalping at all. 81386-36495= 44891 points of loss or profit during the reverse. Let's subtract another swap, roughly it is 1 point per day per trade, multiply it by 3 days of holding and by the number of deals - 1292, we obtain another 3876 points to the net loss and 41015 points in total - the modulo result. The average profit on a rollover is 31 pips, the PF is about 2. Does it look like that?
The average profit trade is 130 pips (4th sign), the average loss trade is 80 pips, the average holding time is 3 days. In other words, it is not scalping at all. 81386-36495= 44891 points of loss or profit in reversal. Let's subtract another swap, roughly it is 1 point per day per trade, multiply it by 3 days of holding and by the number of deals - 1292, we obtain another 3876 points to the net loss and 41015 points in total - the modulo result. The average profit on a rollover is 31 pips, the PF is about 2. Doesn't it look like that?
Flipping is a stupid intention. It means changing the trading system. But it's already set up, even without looking at the result, it works.
Another thing is to create a profitable TS. For that you need some knowledge and skills in the subject.
Trading is like playing the piano, not everyone can play it well. And not at all will be able to play it.
Flipping is a stupid intention. It means changing the trading system. But it has already been created, even without looking at the result, it works.
Creating a profitable TS is another thing. For that you need some knowledge and skills in the subject.
Trading is like playing the piano, not everyone can play it well. And not at all will be able to play it.
Let's have a better look at the specific signal of the author of the topic. His chart looks not like a SB, but a stable trend, the average trade result is noticeably larger than the spread, the distribution of profits/losses is far from being monetary (after converting to TP=SL), so we may cautiously assume that everything is correct modulo, only it opens permanently in the wrong direction, then it is solved by simple position reversal. If you can substantively refute this assumption by analyzing the signal statistics - I'd love to hear it, it's interesting. About the general case is not interesting, it is obvious that the random strategy will continue to pour in after a reversal.
Let's have a better look at the specific signal of the author of the thread. His chart looks not like a SB, but a steady trend, the average trade result is noticeably larger than the spread, the distribution of profits/losses is far from monetary (after converting to TP=SL), so we can cautiously assume that all is done correctly modulo, only opens permanently to the wrong side, then it is solved by simple position reversal. If you can substantively refute this assumption by analyzing the signal statistics - I'd love to hear it, it's interesting. About the general case it's not interesting, it's obvious that the random strategy will continue to pour in after a reversal.
If reversing orders-positions thenthe steady trend will be the opposite.
I am watching Yusuf, as he is a permanent member of the forum. A lot of people are watching me too and that's OK)).
You're right, but I'm starting from the fact that PNBs best describe the regularities of a series of numbers.
If you reverse orders-positions,the steady trend will be the opposite.
If it does, what else is needed? A sustained upward trend is a success.
I'm not sure I've interpreted and "reversed" the signal statistics correctly, but maybe someone can correct it, it's a curious situation.
If you reverse orders-positions,the steady trend will be the opposite.
I am watching Yusuf, as he is a regular on the forum. Many people are watching me too and it's OK)).
If you reverse orders-positions,the steady trend (in the balance) will be @the same@ (this is extremely sudden and unexpected in everyday life, but it's an applied terror).
This is exactly the nuance on which all beginners get stuck. And me, too, in my time. "Reversing" the direction of transactions, even with the substitution of TP<->SL does not lead to the opposite result. A loss-making trade does not become profitable.
If it does, what else is needed? A sustained upward trend is a success.
I'm not sure I've interpreted and "flipped" the signal statistics correctly, well maybe someone can correct, it's a curious situation.
The virtual or real position reversal itself has never led to a positive result in the open. Further I am as quiet as a mouse.
When are you going to realise that a trend is either someone's or a group's trading network in a counter-trend
?
When are you going to realise that a trend is either someone's or a group's trading network in a counter-trend
?
I will add.
Any price movement depends on speculators. And the big players take advantage of that liquidity.