New strategy for coding

New strategy called Gabin System.
For understanding, I suppose an account of $ 1 000, a first order of 0.05 and a pending order of 0.20 at 8 pips.
The TF is M5 or M15 (it’s not really very important) and the filter is MA 20,0,0. With my leverage $4 = 8 pips.
We take profit at only $ 4 Target (depending of course of the initial account) by the line if (AccountEquity()>AccountBalance()+ Target)
If the MA is up (for down, it is the opposite), we open a buy order 0.05 and a sellstop 0.20 at 8 pips below.
If the first trade is winner, we gain $ 4, the pending order is deleted and the cycle goes on.
If the price is against the first trade, the sellstop is triggered and immediately a new pending order buystop 0.35 is set 10 pips above (*).
If the price goes down, we take profit at $ 4. All the orders are deleted and the cycle goes on.
If the price is up again , the buystop is triggered and a sellstop 0.40 is set at 8 pips below.
If the price is down again, the sellstop is triggered and a buystop 0.40 is set at 8 pips above.
Etc etc… you see the logic…the sequence is 0.05, 0.20, 0.35, 0.40, 0.40, 0.40 etc
So you begin the trade with a channel of 8 pips: when the price overfills the channel of 8 pips above or below, you win.
Note:
The goal of $ 4 is willingly weak to avoid a big drawdown. I prefer small profits regularly.
It is not a martingale because in our case the maxi lot is 0.40 no more.
The only problem is a flat market but it is very rare for the market to stay a long time in a range of 24 pips (with a channel of 8 pips) and however the DD is kept within reasonable limits. We need a volatile pair and GBPUSD is a good candidate. Maybe a smaller channel is better (< 8 pips)????
Of course, my values need to be optimized but without EA it’s difficult to know it. In manual trading, the system is working nicely but it’s difficult to stay a long time in front of the screen. Options: timer to choose trading period, emergency_stop, stop_after_profit,etc..

Hi,
Nobody wants to code that ?
To help, I found this wellknown EA.
But it needs some modifications:
1/ the stoploss don't have to close the current order (lol) but only trigger the nextly one depending the progression 0.05,0.20,0.35;040,0.40 etc...
2/ so no order is closed
3/ TP is not used and the system closes in profit with the formula if (AccountEquity()>AccountBalance()+ Target) { CloseOrders(Magic);}

I think a good coder can make that.
Thank you.

This strategy is not new, the idea has been around the block many times before, e.g. here, here and here. The best attempt to automate something similar that I've seen can be found in this thread. So yes, it can definitely be coded. Now you need to convince a programmer (but not me!!) why he should revisit it one more time.

This system is not a martingale et gives good results in manual.

You want to stay in front of the screen 24/24 ?
Tomorrow you can verify the efficiency of the method described post 1 with the lots 0.05,0.20,0.35,0.40 on GBPUSD or EURUSD

I don't think that's correct. Assuming that I understand your diagram correctly:

If your 0.05 position reaches its TP, your net result is +$4, minus broker costs.
If your 0.20 position reaches its TP, your net result is -8+16 = +$8, minus broker costs for 2 positions.
If your 0.35 position reaches its TP, your net result is +4-32+28 = $0, minus broker costs for 3 positions, making it a loss.
If your 0.40 position reaches its TP, your net result is -8+16-56+32 = -$16, and broker costs for 4 positions make the loss even bigger!
If your second 0.40 position reaches its TP, your net result is +4-32+28-64+32 = -$32, and broker costs for 5 positions make the loss even bigger!
If your third 0.40 position reaches its TP, your net result is -8+16-56+32-64+32 = -$48, and broker costs for 6 positions make the loss even bigger!

Each 0.40 position after that simply adds a further $16 loss, and extra broker costs.
You can see from the above that it's not worth adding positions after the 0.20 position.

To make this work properly, i.e. guarantee recovery of all previous losses, you must use a sizing progression in the ratio 1,3,6,12,24,48,96,192,..... (as shown here), which means that you MUST use a martingale. Then if price moves sideways for long enough, you eventually run out of money in the account, that's needed to keep increasing your position. That is why I don't believe it's worth using -- let alone coding -- this type of system.

Hi hanover
You're right.
In manual trading, I did not go beyond the third level.
Let's forget.

there was a guy in Australia who traded PAM on a similar strategy and he went bust

the video explains the strategy.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ny96wt8Y-Y0

Many thanks, I found the video interesting.

The premise that you can make money no matter which way the retail spot fx market moves doesn't make sense to me. To profit you must ultimately leave yourself either net long or net short, which -- everything else being equal -- creates a 50/50 win-loss proposition, minus costs; while any hedges or rings merely reduce down to simpler net positions. Ultimately, then, you must establish some kind of demonstrable bias either within your entry or your exit, to overcome costs and generate profit. There is no free lunch, no easy way around this; if there was, it would have been discovered long ago, and all retail traders would be rich (and moreover, markets are a (pseudo-)zero-sum game, where each willing buyer must ultimately find a willing seller, who is equally confident in his position.......)

You can visit here,

https://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=590099