Jump to content

IamJon

Members
  • Posts

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by IamJon

  1. Re: The End of Retail Forex in USA?

     

    I do not believe that 10:1 leverage will be the end to retail forex in the USA. It does make it more difficult for those who don't have the funds to trade larger position sizes. It does benefit the broker more than the trader as one must have more money in the brokerage account to trade a given size. It is actually safer for the trader to keep minimal funds in the brokerage account but never leverage more than 10:1 on his/her total available capital. Now the brokerage gets to sit on the larger deposit. If the brokerage goes bankrupt (and some have) the trader stands to lose 10x more money than he would have otherwise lost. If scalping has been the mainstay for a trader, they will have to do it overseas. I must admit some of the better brokers are not in the US. I live in the US and I am concerned that I need a lot of capital in my brokerage account to continue trading but I have also learned through my own mistakes that overleveraging is a recipe for disaster.

     

    Just my 2 pips.

  2. Re: Asfafx Trading

     

    Opensourcefx,

     

    Thanks for sharing your system. I do have a few questions after multiple passes of this thread including page 1 rules.

    Is it expected that I change the MTF Stoch timeframe to 4H (240 min) for the M15 timeframe?

    Am I only looking for blue over red in the stoch for uptrend, blue under red for downtrend or is the angle important?

    Is my entry the highest "close" of the 3CS for buy, lowest "close" of 3CS for sell?

     

    Thanks

  3. Re: (REQ) www.pipeline forex.com

     

    A reviewer on FPA site says it is just a combination of moving averages :)
    It may be true that this system's indicators may be moving averages and osma but it is also true that some of the best performing systems historically have been based on moving averages. The magic could be in the entry, exit, and trade management techniques. I may also be giving the author more credit than is due.
  4. Re: Building your own EA G/08.

     

    Thoughts on SellLimit and BuyLimit orders.

     

    So the purpose of the placement of the Limit orders is that the expectation that a reactionary point where a price bounce (reversal) is likely to occur at price levels just beyond the SellLimit or BuyLimit values. These reactionary levels would be where expected support or resistance is. Some currency pairs may have regular/fixed price levels where support/resistance may occur. Some say that the GPBUSD regularly bounces at the "figure" + 20pips and the "figure" + 80pips. One would have to do some analysis on a given pair to see if there are sweet spots. In the Greezly code, we can see that the Acceleration indicators is used to delete the Sell or Buy limit orders depending on the sign of the indicator value. The deletion of limit orders based in the Speed indicator is a little more complex. More on this to follow.

  5. Re: Forex Insider Pro

     

    This mqh file is used to ensure the orders are placed as the EA intends them to be. Brokers do not guarantee orders will be placed and executed. This mqh file improves the likelyhood that the order is placed when the EA instructs it to be so. Their may also be a library file that you need that works in tandem with the mqh file. The intent is to improve the reliability of the order placement/execution. The EA will probably not place orders without this file.

  6. Re: Building your own EA G/08.

     

    I have made some observations that may help us progress more quickly.

     

    1. The Acceleration indicator is only used to delete limit orders. It can be disabled by setting UseAcceleratorIndicator to 0.

    2. The CountHighLowLimits is only used to delete stop orders. It can be disabled by setting CountHighLowLimits to 0.

    3. The Speed indicator is used to delete limit orders and place market orders. It can be disabled by setting UseSpeedIndicator to 0.

    If it is enabled by setting UseSpeedIndicator to 1, placement of market orders from the speed indicator can be dissabled by setting iSP_UseForOpenRealOrders to 0.

    4. The Flat indicator places market orders. It can be disabled by setting UseFlatIndicator to 0.

    5. Buy market, limit, and stop order placement can be disabled by setting UseBuy to 0 (or enabled by setting UseBuy to 1).

    6. Sell market, limit, and stop order placement can be disabled by setting UseSell to 0 (or enabled by setting UseSell to 1).

    7.The prices chosen for stop and limit orders are based on the current price level, i.e. if current price is 1.4532, the limit and stop orders are placed at 1.4500 + the level set by BuyStopLevel, SellStopLevel, BuyLimitLevel, and SellLimitLevel.

    8. BuyStopLevel determines the Buy Stop order price. Placing of Buy Stop orders can be disabled by setting BuyStopLevel to -1.

    9. SellStopLevel determines the Sell Stop order price. Placing of Sell Stop orders can be disabled by setting SellStopLevel to -1.

    10. BuyLimitLevel determines the Buy Limit order price. Placing of Buy Limit orders can be disabled by setting BuyLimitLevel to -1.

    11. SellLimitLevel determines the Sell Limit order price. Placing of Sell Limit orders can be disabled by setting SellLimitLevel to -1.

     

    I will try to spend some time explaining more of the parameters. Any corrections to my explainations are most welcome. Thanks finemej and qwertyasdf999 for keeping this thread alive. As you may have determined, enabling the sell logic by setting SellDenyLevel to 0 did not improve the backtest results. The market conditions did not work well over the time period used by finemej for backtesting for this EA with the Sell logic enabled. Is it possible that separating the buy and sell logic/indicator parameters would improve the outcome?

  7. Re: {req} how to modify an ea

     

    I think toritoo wants the EA to perform orders like the M5G Cyborg EA. An initial (primary) order is placed. If the price goes against the primary order, a second order (auxiliary order) is placed as the expectation is that the price will return in the intended direction. The new take profit level can be lower because the two (or more) orders will average out. The danger with this type of logic (doubling down) is that the price may continue to go against the orders and now you lose twice as much or even worse depending on your stoploss settings. The auxiliary order can be placed with the primary order as a limit or stop order. If the auxiliary order is triggered, new take profit and stop loss values can be set for the orders.

  8. Re: Building your own EA G/08.

     

    The Sell is not working because of the following lines:

     

    extern double BuyDenyLevel                  = 160;     // boundary level of opening orders BUY (above this level warrant can not be opened)
    extern double SellDenyLevel                 = 155;     // boundary level of opening orders SELL (below this level orders can not be opened)

     

    I believe the EA was initially tuned for the GBPJPY. These variables are used to set the price range for the pair to allow buy and sell orders to be placed. The EU would be in a much lower range (~100 times lower). Both of these can be set to 0 and the EA will not "deny" buying or selling based on price levels.

     

    Hint: search for BuyDenyLevel in the code and you will see the deny levels are not used if set to 0.

  9. Re: (REQ) Forex Godfather

     

    I have seen the term "curve fit" in various posts. Is curve fitting the use of optimization to find the most profittable setting for parameters? I.E. could an EA could be written initially with external parameters. They could be optimized, then hard coded. Backtesting would then show great results but those results may only be exceptional for the period of the backtest.

     

    Is this what curve fitting would be?

     

    I guess I'll have to answer this question myself...

     

    Yes Iamjon. That would be what curve fitting is.

  10. Re: How To Optimize an EA

     

    Now that an EA has been optimized, how should the optimized values for stoploss and takeprofit be treated? Obviously they have worked for the start date through the end date that the optimization was performed. Once the chosen variable parameters are now evaluated to maximize profit, drawdown, etc. There should be comfort in keeping some values such as a moving average period but stoploss and takeprofit appear to be another issue, or should there be any comfort?

     

    Should the takeprofit value be reduced by some amount (say 25%) to increase the probability it will get hit? This would be assuming that simulation shows that reducing the SL to the reduced value still shows reasonable profitability.

     

    What should be done to the stoploss value? One would think increasing the stoploss may cause bigger losses but decreasing it may also cause trades to be stopped out more often.

     

    Should one look at each trade made in the simulation for a given set of parameters and evaluate how it performed? One would suspect this is a good idea to evaluate how much wiggle room the SL and TP have.

     

    A parameter such as a moving average period should also be evaluated for sensitivity. Example: 15 period works superior but 14 and 16 fail miserably. Although 15 is the optimal value there is no tolerance. Any value between 20 and 30 works reasonably well even though 25 is worse than 24 or 26. Can it be assumed the system will not perform over time if 15 is chosen? (25 at least allows for the most variance).

     

    Questions, questions...

  11. Re: IBFX

     

    People,

     

    I have run a spread history indicator on various pairs. Most of the time the spreads are acceptable but in times of "low liquidity" EUR/USD can go from 2 pips to 12 or more in a heartbeat. I have observed the spread sit at 12 pips for more than an hour. This can be real trouble for EAs or even live trading. I am not sure what I will do going forward. I have disabled all EAs at this point in time as all were losing more than they were making.

×
×
  • Create New...