Menu
Sister Sites

Options

Bookmark Thread

First Page First Unread Last Page Last Post

Print Thread

Similar Threads

Money management: Capital needed per 0.07 USD per microlot 0 replies

The Volume Detective 411 replies

Attachments: (binned per thread starter’s request) MM (Money Maker) Detective
Exit Attachments

(binned per thread starter’s request) MM (Money Maker) Detective

EURGBP sell signal on H1 with one bar both giving entry and exit signal. It is time to test if we are going to see continuous trades when next bar starts.

Edit: Had the same situation on GBPNZD, too. EA did not open a new trade as explained by r4me. Thanks again Steve for your hard work.

Regards,
Blackeagle
Quoting stevebenik
{quote} Have any idea why I don't get any trades! Thanks, Steve! {image}
Its because there is no signal yet from the indicator to the ea. be patience! thats the KEY

the trades are fewer but its surely
Txs a lot!
Quoting princiano
{quote} Thank you so much sir! thanks for the clarification too Much respect to your effort. for my TP and SL settings i use 0.4 and 3.80 (this works magic)
Whoa. That is a horrible risk/reward ratio, friend. Do you realize you have to win 9.5 trades for every loss you incur? Meaning your win percentage has to be 95% just to break even!

TF
Prices are never too high to begin buying or too low to begin selling.
Finally, I am up & running!

Last question:

Does anyone knows an EA that copies only the trades having profits from demo mt4 to real account!?

Txs again!
Hi R4M & BD,
From everyone using BDX, thank you @Robot4me and @Bishopdotun for this terrific system and for generously giving it out with super responsive enhancements and bug fixes.

A question on future plans:
Any plan to adjust to new US broker incremental lot-size rule?
R4M has mentioned that Oanda, and other US brokers, now require US traders use different lot sizes for successive orders of same pair. Currently we have to limit MaxOpenTrades to 1 or run multiple BDX with different MagicNumbers and different, incremental LotSizes.
Or, are there any other ideas to get around this restriction?

Once more, thank you for your hard work,
John
Perfidious Pips
Quoting northwind
Hi R4M & BD, From everyone using BDX, thank you @Robot4me and @Bishopdotun for this terrific system and for generously giving it out with super responsive enhancements and bug fixes. A question on future plans: Any plan to adjust to new US broker incremental lot-size rule? R4M has mentioned that Oanda, and other US brokers, now require US traders use different lot sizes for successive orders of same pair. Currently we have to limit MaxOpenTrades to 1 or run multiple BDX with different MagicNumbers and different, incremental LotSizes. Or, are there...
Hi @northwind
@robots4me is a US citizen, so he may introduce a lot increment.
If your from the US, best bet would be to find a reliable VPN, and setup with an offshore broker, or use an offshore brokers VPS.
But then you will need to sort out your billing method also.
Does anyone know why they are screwing with you guy's.
Quoting FiveRows
{quote} Hi @northwind @robots4me is a US citizen, so he may introduce a lot increment. If your from the US, best bet would be to find a reliable VPN, and setup with an offshore broker, or use an offshore brokers VPS. But then you will need to sort out your billing method also. Does anyone know why they are screwing with you guy's.
US doesn't like leveraged speculation.
Quoting YoungET
{quote} US doesn't like leveraged speculation.
They do that to "protect" us. In reality, some of the rules make trading MORE risky, such as disallowing hedged trades.

TF
Prices are never too high to begin buying or too low to begin selling.
Quoting FiveRows
{quote} Hi @northwind @robots4me is a US citizen, so he may introduce a lot increment. If your from the US, best bet would be to find a reliable VPN, and setup with an offshore broker, or use an offshore brokers VPS. But then you will need to sort out your billing method also. Does anyone know why they are screwing with you guy's.
i have to agree. an offshore broker and VPS is needed
I know this has been discussed previously in the thread by @Viktory and others, but I do think it would be nice to have a setting for MinDistanceBetweenOrders. I noticed today I had my 4 EURJPY orders opened in the space of only 7 pips. Ideally those should be separated by a number of pips or by %ADR.

TF
Prices are never too high to begin buying or too low to begin selling.
Quoting turtlefan
I know this has been discussed previously in the thread by @Viktory and others, but I do think it would be nice to have a setting for MinDistanceBetweenOrders. I noticed today I had my 4 EURJPY orders opened in the space of only 7 pips. Ideally those should be separated by a number of pips or by %ADR. TF
Quote
Ideally those should be separated by a number of pips or by %ADR. TF

"by a number of pips" -- like what? Give me a number that works across all pairs and time frames.

"by %ADR" -- like what? Give me a number that works across all pairs and time frames.

@turtlefan -- no more development based on "hunches". If you can provide tested values that work across all pairs and time frames then I would consider it.
Quoting turtlefan
I know this has been discussed previously in the thread by @Viktory and others, but I do think it would be nice to have a setting for MinDistanceBetweenOrders. I noticed today I had my 4 EURJPY orders opened in the space of only 7 pips. Ideally those should be separated by a number of pips or by %ADR. TF
I had same orders.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot_2019-09-04-00-19-27-59_a068875e8d70110f8d1ec48729c67374.png Size: 265 KB
Quoting robots4me
{quote} {quote} "by a number of pips" -- like what? Give me a number that works across all pairs and time frames. "by %ADR" -- like what? Give me a number that works across all pairs and time frames. @turtlefan -- no more development based on "hunches". If you can provide tested values that work across all pairs and time frames then I would consider it.
It is no hunch that it opened 4 EURJPY buy orders within 7 pips, which I think we can agree isn't ideal. It's like taking one position at four times the normal risk. I don't know what the best number is, which would be the whole point of a variable that could be changed by the users for testing purposes. But if that is too much work or not something you wish to explore, please forget I mentioned it. Just an idea.

TF
Prices are never too high to begin buying or too low to begin selling.
Quoting turtlefan
{quote} It is no hunch that it opened 4 EURJPY buy orders in 7 pips, which I think we can agree isn't ideal. It's like taking one position at four times the normal risk. I don't know what the best number is, which would be the whole point of a variable that could be changed by the users for testing purposes. But if that is too much work or not something you wish to explore, please forget I mentioned it. Just an idea. TF
maybe we can try 2 allpairs ea with h1 tf, one windows with 50% adr and the other with 75%, 100% or whatever numbers. 1 maxopentrade on each ea.
Quoting karandiru
{quote} maybe we can try 2 allpairs ea with h1 tf, one windows with 50% adr and the other with 75%, 100% or whatever numbers. 1 maxopentrade on each ea.
No, not talking about the width of the bands. We can already test that with Extreme Price (%ADR). This would be once price is already in extreme territory and would enable us to specify a minimum distance between orders so that you don't have multiple orders just a few pips apart. Trading manually would be the only way to test different values at this point.

TF
Prices are never too high to begin buying or too low to begin selling.
Quoting robots4me
{quote} {quote} "by a number of pips" -- like what? Give me a number that works across all pairs and time frames. "by %ADR" -- like what? Give me a number that works across all pairs and time frames. @turtlefan -- no more development based on "hunches". If you can provide tested values that work across all pairs and time frames then I would consider it.
Good morning Steve. It seems to me that nobody has this data, something new is being created here, and since it is new, you have to investigate that hypothesis, and it should be done with trial and error.

To obtain this data, the user would have to be allowed to place their personal settings. And so among all find those general values for the configuration. In any case it is a lot of work ahead, and we should all be committed to doing so, but most of the work is for you.

It is just an opinion.

Greetings from Ecuador
IH - B221 Return Today: -0.2%
Quoting turtlefan
{quote} It is no hunch that it opened 4 EURJPY buy orders within 7 pips, which I think we can agree isn't ideal. It's like taking one position at four times the normal risk. I don't know what the best number is, which would be the whole point of a variable that could be changed by the users for testing purposes. But if that is too much work or not something you wish to explore, please forget I mentioned it. Just an idea. TF
@turtlefan -- it's okay to mention ideas. And my point is that people mention ideas and expect that I would know what the right number is. It is not difficult to implement -- I can separate trades by 2 pips, 22.3 pips, 1022 pips. But I am not a magician and I can't predict the future and I am not about to spend hours, weeks, months testing for the right number.

Quote
I don't know what the best number is, which would be the whole point of a variable that could be changed by the users for testing purposes.
@turtlefan -- and how exactly will people test. Will you be in charge to make sure the testing is done methodically and all scenarios covered?

Quote
I think we can agree isn't ideal. It's like taking one position at four times the normal risk.
There are other settings that can be used to tailor the frequency of trades -- these have been discussed previously.

@turtlefan -- my frustration is not directed at you. I understand that someone who has never programmed doesn't think about what steps would be required to implement a feature.
Quoting Vicente
{quote} Good morning Steve. It seems to me that nobody has this data, something new is being created here, and since it is new, you have to investigate that hypothesis, and it should be done with trial and error. To obtain this data, the user would have to be allowed to place their personal settings. And so among all find those general values for the configuration. In any case it is a lot of work ahead, and we should all be committed to doing so, but most of the work is for you. It is just an opinion. Greetings from Ecuador
@Vicente -- separating trades by pips is a "hack". That value would change by pair, time frame, market conditions. Whatever value you came up with today would not be valid tomorrow.

If someone wishes to change the frequency of trades there are better ways -- which have already been discussed.

The BDX strategy is beautiful in its simplicity. I suggest that those who think hacking away at it by adding curve-fitted values take a step back and get a better grasp on how the algorithm works. And then a more simple solution might occur to you.
Quoting turtlefan
{quote} No, not talking about the width of the bands. We can already test that with Extreme Price (%ADR). This would be once price is already in extreme territory and would enable us to specify a minimum distance between orders so that you don't have multiple orders just a few pips apart. Trading manually would be the only way to test different values at this point. TF
I think its a great idea (for manual trading).

If with 50% ADR the first trade gets stopped out, I would only reenter a second time at 75% ADR and if that gets stopped out, I would only reenter the third and last time with 100% ADR.
0 traders viewing now