The order, timing and potential of the trading process - 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
The lock can be done on a group of pairs, you can check it on the demo:
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/366487/page44#comment_21819394
You haven't finished reading it: it's impossible to do it with equal lots.
The link shows an intentional lock, 2 pairs and their cross. Yusuf doesn't have that, so he can't have lots either.
You haven't read it all: it's not possible in principle to trade with the same lots.
The link shows an intentional lock, 2 pairs and their cross (ring). Yusuf has no such thing, so he cannot have lots either.
The point is that if you open with different volumes, some of the volumes will still form a balanced ring, i.e. a lock.
And in random multicurrency trading, we will have a lot of such rings. And if there are no swaps, the illusion of active trading with large traded volumes and near-zero results (with slow drawdown, like Yusuf's) is created. The feeling arises that "we need to make some adjustments somewhere and we will make a profit", although in fact it is not so.
The point is that if you open with different volumes, some of the volumes will still form a balanced ring, i.e. a lock.
And in a random multicurrency trade there will be a lot of such rings. And if there are no swaps, then the illusion of active trading with large traded volumes and near-zero results (with slow drainage, like Yusuf's) is created. The feeling arises that "we just need to correct something and it will yield profits", although in fact it is not so.
It seems to me that this should be kept in mind when forming a portfolio, if portfolio trading is intended. And if it's regular multi-currency trading, i.e. opening and closing on each pair is done separately and independently of other pairs, then the presence of the rings you mentioned doesn't matter.
It seems to me that this should be kept in mind when forming a portfolio, if portfolio trading is intended. But if it's regular multi-currency trading, i.e. opening and closing on each pair is done separately and independently of the other pairs, then having the rings you mentioned doesn't matter.
Bullshit.
In both portfolio and multi-currency trading, the target function is the total balance of the trading account. And that means that locks are of huge importance.
It seems to me that this should be kept in mind when forming a portfolio, if portfolio trading is intended. And if it's regular multi-currency trading, i.e. opening and closing on each pair is done separately and independently of the other pairs, then the presence of the rings you mentioned doesn't matter.
The whole point is correct.
Bullshit.
In both portfolio and multicurrency trading, the target function is the total balance of the trading account. Which means locks are of enormous importance.
I think you are mistaken. Let's speculate. Let's assume that there is a balanced triangle in a set of currency pairs selected for trading. When trading in a portfolio it will not give anything except for a loss. But in multicurrency trading, when trading is performed independently for each of the instruments comprising the triangle, it can produce a profit.
I think you are mistaken. Let us speculate. Suppose there is a balanced triangle as part of the set of currency pairs selected for trading. In portfolio trading it will not give anything but losses. But in multicurrency trading, when trading is performed independently for each of the instruments comprising the triangle, it can result in a profit.
Do not prove it - it is meaningless.
Don't be so one-sided. Opposite positions are nothing in terms of profit - that's true. But they do not make a loss (other than the cost of opening and maintaining those positions) - that is their huge impact.
- Diversification?
- Nope, haven't heard of it.
Don't prove it - it's pointless.
You mean you shouldn't throw beads before swine?))).
Well there are a lot of readers here, it might be useful to someone.
You haven't read it all: it's not possible in principle to trade with the same lots.
The link shows an intentional lock, 2 pairs and their cross (ring). Yusuf has no such thing, so he cannot have lots either.
Well, it won't be a full lock, but a partial overlap, due to this there is a small net volume in the market with a lot of unnecessary costs. The trades are independent, but since there is always a signal from the indicator, and the control of the net position is not implemented, these costs are formed all the time.