(binned per thread starter’s request) MM (Money Maker) Detective | Page 338 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
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

  • #6,741
  • Sep 13, 2019 11:59pm Sep 13, 2019 11:59pm
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: dot1.jpg Size: 162 KB
  • #6,742
  • Sep 14, 2019 1:12am Sep 14, 2019 1:12am
Quoting robots4me
I think I have some good news for H1 / 50% ADR traders
Bonjour,
Not at all the same as you
And on several points of the graph

Cheers
jf
PS : (50; 20; 0; consécutive candle)
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: comparer.JPG Size: 134 KB
  • #6,743
  • Edited 6:52am Sep 14, 2019 3:59am | Edited 6:52am
How I filter on H1 or manually on M15 :
The Crossing of a LWMA with the central blue line of R4M.
On M1 I noticed that it repaints a little this crossing. (R4M repaints a little)
Maybe it’s a good filter. Try it ....
Cheers

Have a look please, it's the same graphe GU / Robot4me

EDIT : Another thing you can do to filter is : place an order buy or sell stop a few pips (at least 5 for H1) above/below the previous candle
It's very effective !
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: comparatif B.JPG Size: 246 KB
  • #6,744
  • Sep 14, 2019 4:07am Sep 14, 2019 4:07am
Feedback

Below, I have attached 09/09 - 13/09 open and closed trades report for D1, H4 and H1 trading based on BD's settings except I have tested 100% ADR on H1 with CC entry. I've also attached my statement between 27/08 - 13/09 trading ADR-BDX by EA, no manual intervention. First two weeks, I've traded 50% ADR on H1 with HA Transition entry.

After a big drawdown with 50% ADR on H1 with HA transition between 02/09 - 06/09, this week I've decided to test 100% ADR on H1. Despite some volatility on GBP and EUR pairs, I had only one trade whole week. So I am not sure if 100% ADR on H1 would produce enough number of trades for a profitable portfolio. I can understand it might have better win ratio than 50% ADR, but the number of trades is a concern, IMO. Therefore, I am planning to test a different setting next week on H1.

The results you see below are mostly based on H4 trading. There is a huge drawdown (350 pips) on GBPJPY short trade, no emergency exit kicked in, therefore r4me's new suggestion of using CC as exit might work for these kind of situations to improve overall risk:return.

As I stated before, win ratio for this kind of strategy (with unfavourable risk:return) is very important, especially for H4 and D1 part. Because their TPs help overall risk:return improve.

As a result, including the open trades, my overall return in three weeks is in red. And this week at one time, I had almost 1600 pips drawdown although I am trading only 1 lot per pair per time frame with 0.01 lot size (very conservative).

I am going to continue testing next week with the same H4 and D1 settings, but different H1 ADR setting and let you know the results next weekend.

Have a great weekend.

Regards,
Blackeagle
Attached Image(s) (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Statement_2019-09-14.png Size: 12 KB
Click to Enlarge Name: Sep 9 - Sep 13 - Closed.png Size: 36 KB
Click to Enlarge Name: Sep 9 - Sep 13 - Open.png Size: 33 KB
  • #6,745
  • Sep 14, 2019 7:51am Sep 14, 2019 7:51am
Quoting robots4me
I think I have some good news for H1 / 50% ADR traders. Though my preference is to trade BDX on H4, I have taken note of the desire to trade H1. And though I don't care for the idea of introducing "min distances" or "intervals" between trades based on time, pips, # bars, % ADR, account balance, phase of moon, etc., I think there is another way to mitigate the risk of trading H1 / 50% ADR. Below is a screen shot of what I think leads to problematical trades: {image} You can see the two HA Entry signals the arrows point to. The EA does the right thing...

This is great news. I had a good week with CC on H1 50% ADR. The SL was always my concern but with these exits, it might make me return to HA entries knowing that those going my way will make pips and those going the wrong way will exit nice and early for a small loss.
EX BBMA trader focusing on REE code.
  • #6,746
  • Edited 11:20am Sep 14, 2019 10:02am | Edited 11:20am
Would the one mold policy in allpairs work better if we had separate settings for each pair.
The %ADR is the key feature that determines if the pair will be profitable or not. The system works great as expected, but the right value of the %ADR needs to be taken seriously for the system to come out on top. You have some pairs making good profit, and the others dragging it back into the red.
You could sort out certain pairs only to run in allpairs with the same settings, but even then, some will be not running at optimal value.
While this idea arose from running optimizations on every pair to determine what the best %ADR, SL/TP, max trades should be, it should be an indicator of some importance as to what %ADR works, and what dosn't work for each pair. Some run best at 80%, and other's at 20%. And if you run some pairs at opposite optimal value's, they just don't work, no matter what other settings you give them.
The BDX system works great @robots4me and @Bishopdotun, for every single pair, and that is the sauce, but throwing ketchup on a seafood dish, a steak dinner, or a hot dog, just leads to a bad taste, in some dishes.
I've done some backtest's, and will go single from now on, to test this idea out. I will only pick the strongest candidates, and hopefully come out on top of the allpairs. Mind you, also the TP & SL play a crucial roll also, not so much as the %ADR, but still needs to be configured for each pair.
I'm not sure what can be done, or if it's feasible to input separate settings into the Allpairs EA. You have a switch to select certain pairs, maybe make 11 of these with %ADR blocks (20% - 120%), and input pairs into the right % fields for the first setup, and work on the right universal SL & TP, max trades. Then maybe rework the TP/SL in later with the 11 block setting. Then the maxopentrades.
No proof yet if the backtest results will work, but I'm thinking about the MT4 resources running 20 separate pairs, and if your Allpairs would be beneficial or not to lower the lag.
It's just a thought, and I'm thinking some are running this idea now, and I will be also.
The method is almost solid, but each pair needs to be tweaked.
@robots4me, it depends if you think this has any merit or not, and if it's better putting the right sauce where it's needed, and if this needs an allpair system.

Edit: There's no proof if settings picked from 2, 4, 12 months of backtests would work for 6, 12, 18 months of foward testing. It's just a theory.
  • #6,747
  • Sep 14, 2019 10:19am Sep 14, 2019 10:19am
Quoting FiveRows
The trouble is the one mold policy in allpairs does not work to well. The %ADR is the key feature that determines if the pair will be profitable or not. The system works great as expected, but the right value of the %ADR needs to be taken seriously for the system to come out on top.

Yes. One have to run pair specific statistics for lowering the ADR below 100%.

An other thing avoiding big drawdowns could be a confirmation of two ema 5+13. Like they do in this thread :https://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=89714
Stick to the plan!
  • #6,748
  • Sep 14, 2019 12:00pm Sep 14, 2019 12:00pm
Quoting Blackeagle
Feedback Below, I have attached 09/09 - 13/09 open and closed trades report for D1, H4 and H1 trading based on BD's settings except I have tested 100% ADR on H1 with CC entry. I've also attached my statement between 27/08 - 13/09 trading ADR-BDX by EA, no manual intervention. First two weeks, I've traded 50% ADR on H1 with HA Transition entry. After a big drawdown with 50% ADR on H1 with HA transition between 02/09 - 06/09, this week I've decided to test 100% ADR on H1. Despite some volatility on GBP and EUR pairs, I had only one trade whole week....
@Blackeagle -- thanks very much for your methodical approach to testing and sharing your results. I agree that because of the large risk:return ratio (i.e. ratio of SL:TP) then the win ratio needs to be high.

I'm thinking that with the new CC Exit rule (that protects against the SL being hit) then the risk:return ratio will go down while the win ratio will remain about the same -- thereby making H1/50% a more stable performer. I'll release an updated version tomorrow and we'll see how things play out next week.
  • #6,749
  • Sep 14, 2019 12:15pm Sep 14, 2019 12:15pm
Quoting FiveRows
Would the one mold policy in allpairs work better if we had separate settings for each pair. The %ADR is the key feature that determines if the pair will be profitable or not. The system works great as expected, but the right value of the %ADR needs to be taken seriously for the system to come out on top. You have some pairs making good profit, and the others dragging it back into the red. You could sort out certain pairs only to run in allpairs with the same settings, but even then, some will be not running at optimal value. While this idea arose...
Hello @FiveRows -- yes, of course, if each pair were optimized separately then the optimal %ADR would likely vary from pair-to-pair. But everything comes with a trade-off:

1. Not only would you need to optimize pair-by-pair, you would also need to optimize timeframe-by-timeframe. That's a lot of combinations.

2. The optimal %ADR is sensitive to market conditions -- e.g. ranging, trending, consolidating, etc. So the optimal %ADR per pair and per time frame would need to continuously be recalibrated -- once a week? once a month?

3. The complexity of the algorithm would increase by an order of magnitude and there is always a price to be paid when complexity goes up -- either directly or indirectly.

The magic sauce is %ADR and simplicity. That doesn't mean that 100% ADR works best for all pairs or that the current level of simplicity (if "simplicity" could be quantified) is optimal for all pairs. Rather -- think of it as a "sweet spot" for 28 pairs. Think of the 28 pairs as one basket or as an "index". Also, once you go down the path of recalibrating per pair per timeframe per market condition then it becomes never ending and you'll be spending hours every week micromanaging settings for %ADR, SL, TP. Since I'm a developer my first couple of years trading forex I went down that path -- I have no interest in revisiting that. I'm content with good performance -- for those who require optimal performance then this is not the right strategy.
  • #6,750
  • Sep 14, 2019 12:19pm Sep 14, 2019 12:19pm
Quoting le celte
How I filter on H1 or manually on M15 : The Crossing of a LWMA with the central blue line of R4M. On M1 I noticed that it repaints a little this crossing. (R4M repaints a little) Maybe it’s a good filter. Try it .... Cheers Have a look please, it's the same graphe GU / Robot4me EDIT : Another thing you can do to filter is : place an order buy or sell stop a few pips (at least 5 for H1) above/below the previous candle It's very effective ! {image}
@le celte -- to me this looks like you are trying to convert a reversal strategy into a trend-following strategy.
  • #6,751
  • Sep 14, 2019 12:30pm Sep 14, 2019 12:30pm
Quoting robots4me
{quote} @le celte -- to me this looks like you are trying to convert a reversal strategy into a trend-following strategy.
Hi,
No, not at all !
Try it please
I just filter a little the entry
And for exit it's a must
I take exactly Dots and X like the rules of this magical indy. Reversal !

Cheers
jf
  • #6,752
  • Sep 14, 2019 5:29pm Sep 14, 2019 5:29pm
Quoting le celte
{quote} Hi, No, not at all ! Try it please I just filter a little the entry And for exit it's a must I take exactly Dots and X like the rules of this magical indy. Reversal ! Cheers jf
@le celte -- the second blue dot that you've labeled "Don't enter here" actually occurs *after* the crossing. This is not a good filter for BDX because you have to calibrate the period of the LWMA for each pair and time frame. And no one knows what the best value is.

I think this *is* trend-following -- you are relying on an MA such that you only BUY if below the MA and only SELL if above the MA. An MA indicator is typically used to detect trends. The BDX strategy doesn't care about trends. It only cares about extreme prices.
  • #6,753
  • Sep 14, 2019 5:33pm Sep 14, 2019 5:33pm
Quoting lemercenaire
{quote} Understood...and it certainly would, yes. Thanks so much.
@lemercenaire -- here is a standalone Consecutive Candles indicator that uses the same settings as BDX:
Attached File(s)
File Type: ex4 R4M-ConsecutiveCandles.ex4   39 KB | 583 downloads


A blue 'x' indicates an Exit signal for an open BUY, and a purple 'x' indicates an Exit signal for an open SELL.
  • #6,754
  • Sep 14, 2019 6:25pm Sep 14, 2019 6:25pm
Quoting robots4me
{quote} Hello @FiveRows -- yes, of course, if each pair were optimized separately then the optimal %ADR would likely vary from pair-to-pair. But everything comes with a trade-off: 1. Not only would you need to optimize pair-by-pair, you would also need to optimize timeframe-by-timeframe. That's a lot of combinations. 2. The optimal %ADR is sensitive to market conditions -- e.g. ranging, trending, consolidating, etc. So the optimal %ADR per pair and per time frame would need to continuously be recalibrated -- once a week? once a month? 3. The complexity...

Hello @robots4me.
Thankyou for your wise words. There's some points you made that would involve a great deal of constant mico-managing. I started testing the history to find the pairs preferred settings, and come up with a ball park setting for the allpairs. I noticed that some would have to be illiminated from the pool.
The idea running separate pairs came up because of the no shoe fitted all.
I'm currently running through the 1H TF, and maybe try out the 30 and 4H, and see if a pair will run better on them. And the plan would be to re-evaluate once a month with 10 - 15 optimal pairs.
It also makes it difficult to settle on the right build to conduct these tests, when there's new updates coming through.
I still run 2 x 28 allpairs 1H @ 75%. 1 older build, the other newer, and looking to find the optimal setting's for them.
Keep up the good work.
  • #6,755
  • Sep 14, 2019 6:32pm Sep 14, 2019 6:32pm
Quoting robots4me
{quote} @lemercenaire -- here is a standalone Consecutive Candles indicator that uses the same settings as BDX: {file} A blue 'x' indicates an Exit signal for an open BUY, and a purple 'x' indicates an Exit signal for an open SELL.
Thank you so much. You are an absolute star.
  • #6,756
  • Sep 14, 2019 6:45pm Sep 14, 2019 6:45pm
Quoting FiveRows
{quote} Hello @robots4me. Thankyou for your wise words. There's some points you made that would involve a great deal of constant mico-managing. I started testing the history to find the pairs preferred settings, and come up with a ball park setting for the allpairs. I noticed that some would have to be illiminated from the pool. The idea running separate pairs came up because of the no shoe fitted all. I'm currently running through the 1H TF, and maybe try out the 30 and 4H, and see if a pair will run better on them. And the plan would be to re-evaluate...
@FiveRows -- thanks for accepting my comments in the spirit I intended. I agree with your comment that no shoe fits all. But I would add you never know which pairs to trade at any point in time because the pairs that fit the shoe are a moving target. I've written software that trades hundreds of strategies across many pairs and constantly monitors results and toggles pairs on and off depending on how they trade in a dummy account. It works, but it requires continuous recalibration.

The AllPairs EA allows you to specify which pairs to trade and, so, if you are willing to do the work then you can be selective as to which pairs to trade.

Before you get too deep into your testing how about waiting until I release the next version of BDX that uses CC Exits since I think it will help with H1 performance. Along with H4, I would like to get H1 to perform more reliability.
  • #6,757
  • Edited 2:18am Sep 15, 2019 1:02am | Edited 2:18am
Quoting robots4me
{quote}This is not a good filter for BDX because you have to calibrate the period of the LWMA for each pair and time frame. And no one knows what the best value is.
Hi
No I use the same LWMA on all pairs and all TF
But ou have to calibrate R4M for each pair and TF .... ;-)

It's reversal. I use Points of reversal R4M. But what matters Reversal or not Reversal!
What is important?
To win, to be a winner, no ?

Here (in red) you lose , I win. And that’s just an example. The one you gave some posts before
I don't take the first point reversal. That's all
I take the firsts reversal points AFTER lwma crossing blue

Cheers sir
jf
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: comparatif B.JPG Size: 246 KB
  • #6,758
  • Edited 2:41am Sep 15, 2019 2:18am | Edited 2:41am
Quoting le celte
{quote} Hi No I use the same LWMA on all pairs and all TF But ou have to calibrate R4M for each pair and TF .... ;-) It's reversal. I use Points of reversal R4M. But what matters Reversal or not Reversal! What is important? To win, to be a winner, no ? Here (in red) you lose , I win. And that’s just an example. The one you gave some posts before I don't take the first point reversal. That's all Cheers sir jf {image}
@le celte -- yes, winning is important.

BDX is a reversal strategy and you've changed the logic by adding additional rules. Why not use Strategy Tester to compare your new strategy with BDX over several hundred trades of different pairs and different time frames to see if it really holds up. Using a single example doesn't really prove anything, right?

Quote
But ou have to calibrate R4M for each pair and TF
I don't understand this statement. Where in BDX do we calibrate each pair and TF?

Below is an example where your filter does not work -- it would ignore a winning BUY trade:
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: lecelte-01.png Size: 46 KB
  • #6,759
  • Sep 15, 2019 6:26am Sep 15, 2019 6:26am
Quoting robots4me
I don't understand this statement. Where in BDX do we calibrate each pair and TF?
Speaking of BDX settings for each pair and TF

cheers
jf
  • #6,760
  • Sep 15, 2019 9:40am Sep 15, 2019 9:40am
The problem of deciding when a TMA extream will turn the other way is not an easy one to crack with conventional indicators. If you were to drop down to a lower time frame and look at the bars forming, you can see (for a new bull trend) the bottoms finding support that are the tops of resistance a few bars back. You dont find this when the original trend is bumping on down and not reversing yet. I dont know if that helps or pointing out the obvious. It is someting I'm developing (an indicator based on price action) for this situation.
2 traders viewing now