Discussion of article "Money-Making Algorithms Employing Trailing Stop" - page 2
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 SL and TP are set at the input. Accordingly, the exit will be either way. Either by footsteps (SL or TP), or by Kolya Marzhov's command.
So I'm saying that it's not clear whether it's necessary to trawl at all, maybe it will be better without trawling (of course it won't be better, but there's nothing to compare it with, with or without trawling)?
algorithm
1. Input random
2. Set TP and SL
3. Wait for triggering
4. Return to 1
I wanted to include this algorithm in the article first. But it is complicated. And the article turned out to be cumbersome. It is necessary to write a separate article on this algorithm. In general, the conclusions are as follows
1. the algorithm is profitable on trend and anti-trend rates at the appropriate choice of TP and SL.
2. The profitability of the algorithm is much less than that of trailing stop because of much higher drawdowns. The algorithm has almost no stable triggering points - crises like trailing, so everything is much worse. The algorithm does not follow the market and is very similar to a lottery player.
The power of my computer and my patience was barely enough to barely see profitability in the noise on the best crises of 2008.
3. The algorithm has interesting properties of pseudo-profitability and pseudo-shedding - another unploughed topic.
This picture is the best we could count. Everything is drowning in noise (read drawdowns). Profitability at SL=120 and large up to 1000 TP.
often (I wanted to say always, but changed my mind - what if someone else has it wrong) trawls reduce expectation and increase the variance of the result of trades -> according to the fundamental trading pattern of R. Vince - this leads to slower profit growth.
And even without Vince I noticed many years ago that the "trawl" instrument is not good for me and excluded it from consideration in my strategies.
I've never seen a trawl increase expectation yet.
+++
A switched on trawl leads to a depo drain, it's been tested in practice.
as they say, this is the case when theory is confirmed by practice.
I killed my first depo thanks to the trawl :(
There are quite a few examples of positive use of TralSL. One of them is the use of relatively popular MDP-advisor logic. Something similar was used here. Such algorithms usually work on FIs with H > 0.5. They have a serious disadvantage of Stop orders execution.
TralTP is a reverse strategy with a serious advantage of Limit orders. As a rule, FIs with H < 0.5 are suitable for its operation. Usually, when optimising the TralTP parameter (abcissa), a hill pattern of the resulting Equity (ordinate) is observed. The same is true for the recovery factor (ordinate).
+++
The switched on trawl leads to depo drain, it's been tested in practice.
as they say this is the case when theory is confirmed by practice.
I killed my first depo thanks to the trawl :(
Interesting article. Although it is not clear how much TS affects the profitability of the system with the next entry. It would be necessary to give balance charts without TS and TP trawls as well
SL and TP are set at entry. Accordingly, the output will be on either. Either by footsteps (SL or TP), or by Kolya Marzhov's command.
So I say that it is not clear whether it is necessary to trawl at all, maybe without trawl it will be even better (of course it will not be better, but there is nothing to compare with, with or without trawl)?
What kind of trailing was used? There are many different types of them.
Built in MT4, but I tried different steps.
The market didn't care what kind of trailing I had, it works according to its own laws.
And the market efficiency will vacuum up the depo at any trailing step.
And then, if the price goes to TR, we trawl SL and TP there, and when it turns, we take it in pincers. We can't wait for it to go negative again and find the SL. (:(( Trawl increases the chances of winning, besides, the TP set after opening a position inevitably becomes outdated by the parameter, as the price changes its activity all the time. In general, it is necessary to put SL and TP in case of a connection breakdown, and the position has a better chance to close on SL. And the trawl leads us to what we want! Isn't it?
I have already written about the transfer to breakeven before, it is put there because of the fear that the bet will not play, make more flexible systems and BU will not be needed.
As for trawling in general, I have already mentioned above, when trawling stoploss is reached more often than take profit (according to statistics), and this respectively cuts profit and increases losses. Even if sl is moved to BU you still get less than when tp is reached. Hence mat. expectation drops.
It is already difficult to win back your money from the market, and here we play a giveaway with our own hands.
In general, IMHO, sl and tp are needed for emergency (force majeure) depo protection. In a normal situation it is necessary to exit in accordance with the forecast about changes in market behaviour. By placing sl and tp, or trawling them you pull patterns on the market, but the market quickly calculates the most significant patterns and effectively works them out.