does this EA work for other forex pairs and cryptos or will i need a separate one ?
My "Ultron" EA for GBPUSD H1 timeframe
- #1,996
- Apr 23, 2019 12:14pm Apr 23, 2019 12:14pm
I think "we" just might be approaching this EA the wrong way. This EA is designed to catch the start of a trend for the GBPUSD which means in a sideways or erratic market with very unusual volatility it will fail - No offence here. Of course we all know the state of the GBPUSD presently.
Now, what if instead of trying to modify the EA we turn to a pair with similar behaviour as the GBPUSD only this time this correlated pair isn't affected by the level of volatility GBPUSD is facing. I wrote about the GBPJPY and heard it did poorly in backtest. Honestly, while I don't undermine the necessity of backtest, like someone said: we are meant to trade the futures not history. Backtesting gives you a clue of a strategy's performance but forward testing tells you if it works in the present market conditions, as we know that the market is dynamic and changes very often.
That said, I've been demo testing quite a number of correlated pairs to the GBPUSD and have found the GBPJPY, EURUSD, GBPAUD doing what GBPUSD was designed to do - I mean doing great. I've looked at how the trades are opened in line with price action and the logic is sound. I'm yet to have a losing trade on those pairs and between them I've had about 8 trades (started testing from March 20, 2019). I have them set for 40 or 50pips TP1 and 80 or 100pips TP2 - depending on the pair - using another EA called Trade Manager to manage the TP levels. Presently I still have a EURUSD trade that just got to TP1 so I'm on a risk free ride at the moment and a GBPJPY that has hit TP2.
What I'm trying to say here in a nutshell is that we shouldn't try to force Ultron to adapt to every market changes as it won't. It's a robot not a human. But we can identify market price action and then decide whether to use Ultron with a different pair from what it's designed for or turn it off completely until the market corrects itself again. Personally I plan on studying the EA more and then utilize some price action skill to know when to turn it on or off and which pair to use it with when I do turn it on but those pairs have to be correlated with the GBPUSD since it's the pair the author designed it with. He definitely had quite a bunch in his mind when he opted for GBPUSD for the strategy and I have to respect that. I've had Ultron turned off for the GBPUSD after my last loss on the 12th of April wherein I did a lil rant on the forum - my apologies if I offended a few. So I guess I was lucky to avoid the recent loss(es).
So think on it people. It's just my 2 cents here.
More Greens
EDIT: The simple way to know that Ultron isn't doing great with GBPUSD is seeing it open Buys at Resistance and Sells at Support and that the pair is swinging up and down in a sideways move. Yes a few breakouts - both real and false - but it then returns to the same range again repeating the same pattern; a real red flag if you ask me.
Now, what if instead of trying to modify the EA we turn to a pair with similar behaviour as the GBPUSD only this time this correlated pair isn't affected by the level of volatility GBPUSD is facing. I wrote about the GBPJPY and heard it did poorly in backtest. Honestly, while I don't undermine the necessity of backtest, like someone said: we are meant to trade the futures not history. Backtesting gives you a clue of a strategy's performance but forward testing tells you if it works in the present market conditions, as we know that the market is dynamic and changes very often.
That said, I've been demo testing quite a number of correlated pairs to the GBPUSD and have found the GBPJPY, EURUSD, GBPAUD doing what GBPUSD was designed to do - I mean doing great. I've looked at how the trades are opened in line with price action and the logic is sound. I'm yet to have a losing trade on those pairs and between them I've had about 8 trades (started testing from March 20, 2019). I have them set for 40 or 50pips TP1 and 80 or 100pips TP2 - depending on the pair - using another EA called Trade Manager to manage the TP levels. Presently I still have a EURUSD trade that just got to TP1 so I'm on a risk free ride at the moment and a GBPJPY that has hit TP2.
What I'm trying to say here in a nutshell is that we shouldn't try to force Ultron to adapt to every market changes as it won't. It's a robot not a human. But we can identify market price action and then decide whether to use Ultron with a different pair from what it's designed for or turn it off completely until the market corrects itself again. Personally I plan on studying the EA more and then utilize some price action skill to know when to turn it on or off and which pair to use it with when I do turn it on but those pairs have to be correlated with the GBPUSD since it's the pair the author designed it with. He definitely had quite a bunch in his mind when he opted for GBPUSD for the strategy and I have to respect that. I've had Ultron turned off for the GBPUSD after my last loss on the 12th of April wherein I did a lil rant on the forum - my apologies if I offended a few. So I guess I was lucky to avoid the recent loss(es).
So think on it people. It's just my 2 cents here.
More Greens
EDIT: The simple way to know that Ultron isn't doing great with GBPUSD is seeing it open Buys at Resistance and Sells at Support and that the pair is swinging up and down in a sideways move. Yes a few breakouts - both real and false - but it then returns to the same range again repeating the same pattern; a real red flag if you ask me.
- #1,997
- Edited 1:54pm Apr 23, 2019 1:42pm | Edited 1:54pm
I was haunted by the option of TP 35)
In the version ULTRON_LITE_3.7 now there are two options for trailing stop.
In the default settings, the first option works, to which we are all accustomed.
The second option "Tralling_from_Profit" works differently: the trailing works after the price reaches the TP level.
If "Tralling_from_Profit" is TRUE, then set Trailing Stop 4, Trailing Step 2. TP 35
The picture is a rough test of this option. Work time I used 10 and 23 (GMT+3 broker)
You can change at your convenience.
If someone can test this option with a simulation quality of 99.9%, then it will be more clear if this makes sense or not.
P.S.
I used 1:300 leverage. It is interesting to look at the result with a leverage of 1:500
In the version ULTRON_LITE_3.7 now there are two options for trailing stop.
In the default settings, the first option works, to which we are all accustomed.
The second option "Tralling_from_Profit" works differently: the trailing works after the price reaches the TP level.
If "Tralling_from_Profit" is TRUE, then set Trailing Stop 4, Trailing Step 2. TP 35
The picture is a rough test of this option. Work time I used 10 and 23 (GMT+3 broker)
You can change at your convenience.
If someone can test this option with a simulation quality of 99.9%, then it will be more clear if this makes sense or not.
P.S.
I used 1:300 leverage. It is interesting to look at the result with a leverage of 1:500
I was haunted by the option of TP 35) In the version ULTRON_LITE_3.7 now there are two options for trailing stop. In the default settings, the first option works, to which we are all accustomed. The second option "Tralling_from_Profit" works differently: the trailing works after the price reaches the TP level. If "Tralling_from_Profit" is TRUE, then set Trailing Stop 4, Trailing Step 2. TP 35 The picture is a rough test of this option. Work time I used 10 and 23 (GMT+3 broker) You can change at your convenience. If someone can test this option with...
There seems to be an issue with the lot sizing though: from order 105 onwards, no further orders are being submitted due to error 131, which is "Invalid trade volume". This usually means that the volume exceeds the maximum allowed for a single trade by the broker (200 lots in my case). If this is fixed, then the EA should go on to return even greater profits.
This is the same data, only using TP=35 and the normal TSL=23/2:
"Pips are vanity. Profit is sanity."