Change Your Thinking. Change Your Life - JD
SRDC II Channel of the day 74 replies
Discussion on EA pertaining to SRDC methods 40 replies
Discussion on Indicators pertaining SRDC 62 replies
SRDC II Journal for All 11 replies
SRDC II Charts posting and discussion pertaining to it 37 replies
Quoting NarcDislikedwouldn't brokers treat the 5 pips TP as scalping? also, which broker did you use to fowardtest this method?Ignored
Quoting OrangeRoshanDislikedIya,
Just an idea, Can an EA be programmed to do the followings:
1) To exit any trade on the next candle when a new candle emerges
2) To move its stoploss to 5pips profits when the trades is above xpips, say x = 35pips. x can be entered manually like the SL
3) To adjust the stop loss with an extra 10pips when the price 5pips near to SL.
4) True/False on SL
ThanksIgnored
Quoting OrangeRoshanDislikedIya,
I notice two things:
1) It lost good profits when it doesnt exit on a start of a new candle.
2) Some trades are not activated when TP is 5pips.
ThanksIgnored
Quoting iyaDislikedShould be easy. Pips to my ears! Let's just see if I got it correctly:
1) We exit on the open of the second candle after the trade triggered.
2) No problem
3) Isn't it the same to make the SL just 10pips larger? You are right. I got mixed up with my other platform. 1,000 Apologies
4) No SL at all? Maybe set it to 1000 pips for the moment.
Yes, I realised Mt4 EA wouldnt execute a trade when it is 0SL. So, puting the logic to false will do it.Ignored
Quoting iyaDislikedCould you look in the results or log what happened to these trades, because I couldn't reproduce it. Maybe it's something about slippage. Is this even possible with pending orders? Sorry I'm still a noob. :
Probably backtesting isn't very reliable on large 'jumps' e.g., on news events.
And what timeframe do you have in mind when there's a new candle, 1H?Ignored
Quoting iyaDislikedCould you look in the results or log what happened to these trades, because I couldn't reproduce it. Maybe it's something about slippage. Is this even possible with pending orders? Sorry I'm still a noob. :
Probably backtesting isn't very reliable on large 'jumps' e.g., on news events.
And what timeframe do you have in mind when there's a new candle, 1H?
Edit:
Well here's the new version. You can now choose the time when the orders are set. My best result was 13:00 CET – int the heat of the London session!
There are also more exit strategies. You can disable most of them by setting them to 0 (KISS). Pretty effective was to close a trade after one 1H candle – 'no matter what'. This way it usually gets the biggest move and also cuts loosers short.
Happy testing!Ignored
Quoting iyaDislikedAhh, alright. Please dont use daily candles for the new version. Everything less should actually give almost identical results, as long as your start time falls on the beginning of a new candle. For example closing after one 1H candle should be the same as closing after 4 15M candles, shouldn't it? But there seem to be some minor differences.Ignored
Quoting OrangeRoshanDislikedIya,
In 1hr, the pip difference at S&R is too tight.Ignored
Quoting iyaDislikedNo, we're still trading on a daily basis, i.e., high and low of the last 24 hours. But the expert now uses the information of smaller timeframe candles, to get entry and exit right.
I hope it still works as intended, because we know optimizing an expert can sometimes change its strategy fundamentally.Ignored
Quoting iyaDislikedThe problem is different versions of MetaTrader from different brockers show different times and even candles. I think if you want to setup the trades at 06:00 brocker time you should set start_time = 6. (What's "spore time"? ) We are 1hr earlier than Tokyo
These time zones drive me crazy. YOU GOT THAT RIGHT!!A new daily candle should form at the opening of Tokio, right? I couldn't even find consistent information if this means 23:00 GMT or 00:00 GMT; on my charts it's labeled 00:00.
"Border" means the 'safety' distance we add to the high and low when setting up the trades. I wanted to call it 'margin' but that was too ambigous. Probably better to rename it distance or simply delete it.
Ignored