# i have a complex questions, im looking for a certin strategy / trade management system

Im wondering what would be the best strategy/trade managment to just make 4-5\$ with a max risk of 300-500\$.
Besides something like martingale or grid.

Meaning you can allow floating draw downs up to 300-500\$, but the strategy should hit 4-5\$ consistantly and not Run out of 500\$ equity.

I know its a weird question, but what has statisticly the highest probability of doing that?

Here a example of a bad approach:

Having a 2-3x pip TP with a 0.20 lot trade, maybe 80-95% of the trades would hit such a small TP an make 4-5\$, but just a matter of Time till some run against you and exceed 500\$ equity.

Im wondering, what would be the smartest way of doing that, making those 4-5\$ with the highest probability and lowest risk possible to not exceed 500\$ Draw down.

tho93:

Im wondering what would be the best strategy/trade managment to just make 4-5\$ with a max risk of 300-500\$.
Besides something like martingale or grid.

Meaning you can allow floating draw downs up to 300-500\$, but the strategy should hit 4-5\$ consistantly and not Run out of 500\$ equity.

I know its a weird question, but what has statisticly the highest probability of doing that?

Here a example of a bad approach:

Having a 2-3x pip TP with a 0.20 lot trade, maybe 80-95% of the trades would hit such a small TP an make 4-5\$, but just a matter of Time till some run against you and exceed 500\$ equity.

Im wondering, what would be the smartest way of doing that, making those 4-5\$ with the highest probability and lowest risk possible to not exceed 500\$ Draw down.

It should be a high-quality complex (not based on known indicators) strategy.  And it's definitely not a martingale.
But my statement is true, if you need it not for binary options, that is, there may be several transactions to achieve the desired result

I believe it is still risky but :

• Get all the edge you can on your side technically - where possible
• Don't trade around risk events

But what would the rules be  ?

If you are in a loss you just sit tight until that order hits -\$500 ?

This could be very long if you use small lots too . Imagine having this consistent \$5 hitter being locked fluctuating between -200\$ and -\$500 until it breaks .

Wouldn't it be better to do the opposite ? (and more fun)

For instance i bet on Poland winning the world cup .

Something like that ,you can still get the edge as above and you can use smaller "shots" at glory as judas priest says.

Nikolai Semko #:
It should be a high-quality complex (not based on known indicators) strategy.  And it's definitely not a martingale.
But my statement is true, if you need it not for binary options, that is, there may be several transactions to achieve the desired result

Great design Nikolai ++

Lorentzos Roussos #:

I believe it is still risky but :

• Get all the edge you can on your side technically - where possible
• Don't trade around risk events

But what would the rules be  ?

If you are in a loss you just sit tight until that order hits -\$500 ?

This could be very long if you use small lots too . Imagine having this consistent \$5 hitter being locked fluctuating between -200\$ and -\$500 until it breaks .

Wouldn't it be better to do the opposite ? (and more fun)

For instance i bet on Poland winning the world cup .

Something like that ,you can still get the edge as above and you can use smaller "shots" at glory as judas priest says.

my goal was to do it a few times a day, i guess the best thing i came up with is the recovery zone / hedge zones, but thats still exponential risk with the possibility of running out of equity. But with this you woudent be stuck in floating losses for days or weeks, at least i dont think so.

The goal is finding the smartest approach with the leas probability of running out of equity, while still hitting those 4-5\$ trades, its for a EA im trying to build and run on demo to see the probbabilitys, how long would it take to make 100% (500\$) with 4-5\$ trades and not running out of 500\$ equity.

tho93: Im wondering what would be the best strategy/trade managment to just make 4-5\$ with a max risk of 300-500\$. Besides something like martingale or grid. Meaning you can allow floating draw downs up to 300-500\$, but the strategy should hit 4-5\$ consistantly and not Run out of 500\$ equity. I know its a weird question, but what has statisticly the highest probability of doing that? Here a example of a bad approach: Having a 2-3x pip TP with a 0.20 lot trade, maybe 80-95% of the trades would hit such a small TP an make 4-5\$, but just a matter of Time till some run against you and exceed 500\$ equity. Im wondering, what would be the smartest way of doing that, making those 4-5\$ with the highest probability and lowest risk possible to not exceed 500\$ Draw down.

There is one excellent way, but you will not like my answer. In fact, you are going to hate it.

However, I ask that you think about it calmly as I am not trying to offend you, but honestly trying to help.

So here goes ...

So, in order to improve your odds and decrease your risk, invest in your trading education and experience. Study and practice. Observe the various markets and try to understand their behaviour. Adapt, much in the same way you do for life. This takes time. It takes years. As you learn and gain experience, you understand and see the “bigger picture”. You see what works and what does not and what is high risk and what is not.

So, if you want consistent gains with low risk, don’t look for a “golden strategy”. Instead, invest in your own trading knowledge and experience and the solution will present itself in time and in a way that you will least expect.

This is my honest advice to you. It’s difficult and I know for a fact that it’s not the answer you want. But it is the best answer you will get if you can recognise its value.

tho93 #:

my goal was to do it a few times a day, i guess the best thing i came up with is the recovery zone / hedge zones, but thats still exponential risk with the possibility of running out of equity. But with this you woudent be stuck in floating losses for days or weeks, at least i dont think so.

The goal is finding the smartest approach with the leas probability of running out of equity, while still hitting those 4-5\$ trades, its for a EA im trying to build and run on demo to see the probbabilitys, how long would it take to make 100% (500\$) with 4-5\$ trades and not running out of 500\$ equity.

Touche .

So the question is do you utilize the recovery keep the system active but endanger the equity , or , sit it out .

Sounds like a fun problem .

The recovery zone has "movement" potential i guess.

You probably already "recover" around Support/Resistance

You could adjust the lot sizing based on volatility as well

But you will encounter another problem in testing . While your orders are in profit you are skipping "signals" . So you are testing for that specific sequence of trade entries and not the signal potential .

Lorentzos Roussos #:

Great design Nikolai ++

Thanks Laurentz :)
It can hardly be called design. It's more of a chaos of parabolas that already form their own picture.

Nikolai Semko #:

Thanks Laurentz :)
It can hardly be called design. It's more of a chaos of parabolas that already form their own picture.

The master of pixels . Looks like an aurora borealis .

Fernando Carreiro #:

There is one excellent way, but you will not like my answer. In fact, you are going to hate it.

However, I ask that you think about it calmly as I am not trying to offend you, but honestly trying to help.

So here goes ...

So, in order to improve your odds and decrease your risk, invest in your trading education and experience. Study and practice. Observe the various markets and try to understand their behaviour. Adapt, much in the same way you do for life. This takes time. It takes years. As you learn and gain experience, you understand and see the “bigger picture”. You see what works and what does not and what is high risk and what is not.

So, if you want consistent gains with low risk, don’t look for a “golden strategy”. Instead, invest in your own trading knowledge and experience and the solution will present itself in time and in a way that you will least expect.

This is my honest advice to you. It’s difficult and I know for a fact that it’s not the answer you want. But it is the best answer you will get if you can recognise its value.

Fernando, I disagree.

There are high-risk strategies that can be more successful in terms of profit and security (as paradoxical as it sounds) than conservative strategies.

The main thing is to risk a small part of your own funds (let's say 1%), and store the rest in a safe place, and most importantly, you need clear discipline for partial withdrawal of funds when intermediate results are achieved. But it only works when the strategy is very effective (when the probability of doubling the deposit is 65-80% compared to losing it completely). First of all, this guarantees protection from black swans, which may arrive in large numbers in the near future. :))

Lorentzos Roussos #:

Touche .

So the question is do you utilize the recovery keep the system active but endanger the equity , or , sit it out .

Sounds like a fun problem .

The recovery zone has "movement" potential i guess.

You probably already "recover" around Support/Resistance

You could adjust the lot sizing based on volatility as well

But you will encounter another problem in testing . While your orders are in profit you are skipping "signals" . So you are testing for that specific sequence of trade entries and not the signal potential .

i also saw a second alternative, but its very complex, i dont understand the logic, here the picture

The EA hedges and adds positions in a way in which equity is kind of secured, it might have a lot of positions open but most are hedged, i would like to build a EA like that, but i dont get the logic

it starts with sells, if they go in profit it closes in profit, if the sells go in DD, it starts hedging and adding sells again at a higher price

Reason: