It's Unreliable | Page 6 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

I think Oanda FXTrade is unreliable 507 replies

List of unreliable brokers (updated once a week) 50 replies

NordFX stop hunting, unreliable with quotes 4 replies

Unreliable demo server 8 replies

Attachments: It's Unreliable
Exit Attachments

It's Unreliable

  • #101
  • Nov 16, 2021 7:57pm Nov 16, 2021 7:57pm
Quoting Konichiwhaat
Ok... now we have all got the small arguments out of the way about ratios, spread, R:R, and had a nice revision of some trading basics, can we get back to the thread topic?... "What is reliable?" What is reliable to you? Your strategy? Your risk management? Your "gut feeling" of a trade? Or a nice mix of all of the above? Is it your instinct, or is it because you have traded that instrument for years and you know it well? Also, could your reliable method be duplicated? Cheers {image}
What's reliable to me is sticking with the daily chart trend, and trading against it only when a strong sign appears indicating a reversal.
Learn from your mistakes and march on.
  • #102
  • Nov 16, 2021 7:59pm Nov 16, 2021 7:59pm
Here is what works for me and you can take it how you want it. Not financial advice what so ever. Price action is my leading indicator, my lagging indicator confirms my direction, price action is also my entry, my stop loss is based on the 1.5 ATR, I scale as my trades make profit. I have a good risk reward ratio. I trade the hourly chart and trend bias comes from the daily and I keep attacking it as my entries happen. I have a 100k account and my leverage is 2:1 and I keep 20 pip stop loss on over night trades and 1.5 ATR on my day time trades which is anywhere from 10-15 pips. I am risking 400 dollars per trade and hit anywhere from 25 plus pips a trade. If I hit my 25 pip minimum a trade I make 500 dollars but sometimes my trades could last more 100 pips. I am risking .4 percent a trade. What's my chart look like? It looks like price action (support resistance, supply demand, fibonacci, drawn out lines that makes support resistance and fibs match), a divergence indicator (detects exhaustion in the trend or continuation trades), channels, two lagging indicators, a symbol changer, sometimes a sentiment indicator so I can see what other traders are doing so I can do the opposite and calendar so I can see what is going on in economic news. Yes, pretty much everything baby pips taught me rolled up into one.
  • #103
  • Nov 16, 2021 8:02pm Nov 16, 2021 8:02pm
Quoting here2there
{quote} What's reliable to me is sticking with the daily chart trend, and trading against it only when a strong sign appears indicating a reversal.
Nice. A type of swing trading method, correct?
Emotional Control. Process, not outcome.
  • #104
  • Nov 16, 2021 8:05pm Nov 16, 2021 8:05pm
Quoting bento2019
Here is what works for me and you can take it how you want it. Not financial advice what so ever. Price action is my leading indicator, my lagging indicator confirms my direction, price action is also my entry, my stop loss is based on the 1.5 ATR, I scale as my trades make profit. I have a good risk reward ratio. I trade the hourly chart and trend bias comes from the daily and I keep attacking it as my entries happen. I have a 100k account and my leverage is 2:1 and I keep 20 pip stop loss on over night trades and 1.5 ATR on my day time trades...
Nice explanation. And a simple system to replicate and stick to. Thanks for sharing
Emotional Control. Process, not outcome.
  • #105
  • Nov 16, 2021 8:17pm Nov 16, 2021 8:17pm
Quoting bento2019
Here is what works for me and you can take it how you want it. Not financial advice what so ever. Price action is my leading indicator, my lagging indicator confirms my direction, price action is also my entry, my stop loss is based on the 1.5 ATR, I scale as my trades make profit. I have a good risk reward ratio. I trade the hourly chart and trend bias comes from the daily and I keep attacking it as my entries happen. I have a 100k account and my leverage is 2:1 and I keep 20 pip stop loss on over night trades and 1.5 ATR on my day time trades...
Using ATR to measure your stop loss is smart.
Learn from your mistakes and march on.
  • #106
  • Nov 16, 2021 8:53pm Nov 16, 2021 8:53pm
Quoting Konichiwhaat
{quote} Nice explanation. And a simple system to replicate and stick to. Thanks for sharing
You may find the following indicator useful. It is MTF, so you will be able to see the ATR for each time frame. You will also be able to adjust it to 1.5 if you desire, or whatever amount your prefer. ATR is also good to use for TP.

Attached File(s)
File Type: mq4 ATR_Value_Dispaly_Mtf.mq4   3 KB | 415 downloads
Learn from your mistakes and march on.
  • #107
  • Edited 10:06pm Nov 16, 2021 9:45pm | Edited 10:06pm
Quoting robots4me
Here we have the math moron attempting to teach others how to do addition and subtraction. @ryuryu -- okay, so you're off ***only*** by a factor of 10, maybe not such a big deal. But you're such a prick about correcting others... It's winter and I'm returning to hibernation -- but this was too juicy to pass on.
Hello my friend! How are you? Where have you been? Was collecting more repainting indicators? I missed you!

Quoting here2there
{quote} It would have been better to simply correct the error instead of attacking the person. Keep it civil.
2+2=17.76?
Error, if it is 0.01% difference. Or even 1%. Who cares? But 344% difference? This is not "error" in calculations. 2 + 2 = exactly 4. It is not 17.76! This is total misunderstanding of processes or deliberately misleading. This mean that the poster or don't understand the basics, or making this specially. In any case this is not good.

Regarding to the topic:

MATH is reliable. Ignorance and nonsense are not reliable.
Observer effect
  • #108
  • Nov 17, 2021 12:41am Nov 17, 2021 12:41am
Quoting ryuryu
{quote} Hello my friend! How are you? Where have you been? Was collecting more repainting indicators? I missed you! {quote} 2+2=17.76? Error, if it is 0.01% difference. Or even 1%. Who cares? But 344% difference? This is not "error" in calculations. 2 + 2 = exactly 4. It is not 17.76! This is total misunderstanding of processes or deliberately misleading. This mean that the poster or don't understand the basics, or making this specially. In any case this is not good. Regarding to the topic: MATH is reliable. Ignorance and nonsense are not reliable....
Whatever... Yes -- math is reliable, but what about statistics or probability? Is probability reliable? Does a 60% win-rate mean it's a reliable strategy? Not necessarily. But, probability is math, right? Stating that math is reliable is like a dodo bird flapping its wings...

Trading is not an exact science. It is a system and, as with any system, there is an equilibrium along with feedback mechanisms. The equilibrium is the channel that price falls within (go learn from @parisboy) and the feedback mechanisms (which are too complex for us to understand) are what pull the price back into the channel whenever it exceeds some extreme price. Would you call a system reliable? Would you call it exact? I'm not so sure.

There is a famous baseball player named Manny Ramirez -- one of the best hitters of all time. When interviewed what was the key to his success he didn't blink -- "See the ball, hit the ball". I think that kind of simplicity and clarity may also be applicable to trading. @ryuryu -- people like you are insecure and feel compelled to impress others and, so, you think by using "math is reliable" as a bat to hit them over the head will in someway convince them you are smarter.

@ryuryu -- obviously you have not come to grips with the point of my post. The point of my post was that you are not the one who should be giving math lessons. Comprende? Perhaps you should take a math refresher and then return to make your point without introducing errors in your simple calculations.
  • #109
  • Nov 17, 2021 1:04am Nov 17, 2021 1:04am
Quoting robots4me
{quote} Whatever... Yes -- math is reliable, but what about statistics or probability? Is probability reliable? Does a 60% win-rate mean it's a reliable strategy? Not necessarily. But, probability is math, right? Stating that math is reliable is like a dodo bird flapping its wings... Trading is not an exact science. It is a system and, as with any system, there is an equilibrium along with feedback mechanisms. The equilibrium is the channel that price falls within (go learn from @parisboy) and the feedback mechanisms (which are too complex for us...
"See the ball, hit the ball". I think that kind of simplicity and clarity may also be applicable to trading.
You put it well. Trading is like a sport. You are on your own to develop your skills and ability to perform.
Practice makes a person perfect
  • #110
  • Edited 2:55am Nov 17, 2021 2:27am | Edited 2:55am
Quoting robots4me
{quote} Whatever... Yes -- math is reliable, but what about statistics or probability? Is probability reliable? Does a 60% win-rate mean it's a reliable strategy? Not necessarily. But, probability is math, right? Stating that math is reliable is like a dodo bird flapping its wings... Trading is not an exact science. It is a system and, as with any system, there is an equilibrium along with feedback mechanisms. The equilibrium is the channel that price falls within (go learn from @parisboy) and the feedback mechanisms (which are too complex for us...
Thank you for your reply. At least we can talk not about magic and feelings, but about math.

Regarding to the probability and statistics. I know that my best trades are with XAU and from NY open + 1 hour. Worth trades are with GU and other pairs. It is statistics. I know that If I'm trading the trend the winrate is >50%, if both ways it is <50% and if against it is <35%. That is probability based on statistics. Also I know if the volume is huge, delta is green and the main trend (local) is bull then it is better to open only longs. That is probability based on statistics again.

Next you are talking about extreme price and channels. But you don't have/use mathematical confirmation what is extreme. To ensure that price is extreme you have to use statistics and math. All you can say that it WAS extreme. But this information is useless NOW. It is so easy to check the chart and say where you should enter and where you should exit. You (using word you I don't mean you exactly, but all) don't understand that the market reflects on your behavior. If some can travel back in time and open the trade at the "great" entry point the future chart will be not the same. You can easy reverse the direction even with your 1 lot size trade.

Don't get me wrong. But 2+2=4. It is not 17.76. Not in this universe.

And of course I don't want to impress anyone. I just want to say that before starting to teach people how to trade first they have to learn (at least) basic math.

Trading is not an exact science, you said. But it IS exact science. You lose because you are waiting for miracle. That your position will recover, that your winrate will be >50% and so on. And most people just don't want to learn and research. All they want is to draw lines and rectangles and to be lucky enough is long run.

100 guys are posting same bullshit for years and other 100 guys are reading that bullshit for years and then start to repeat it. As example check that Stochastic definition on Investopedia:
"it a useful indicator of overbought and oversold conditions"
What a nonsense! Few sentences higher they post stoch formula. There are NO volume data used!!! How the world it can show oversold area?
Or you will say that I'm wrong here too? Forex and trading is full of such a scam. 2+2=17.76, stoch is showing oversold areas and so on. Common.


The topic is "it's unreliable". Yes. Believes, praying, waiting, miracle, magic and luck are not reliable at all. Math is reliable.
Observer effect
  • #111
  • Nov 17, 2021 2:40am Nov 17, 2021 2:40am
Trading is not reliable following "wrong" facts as books or many things in this forum. This is i learnt after a few years experimenting. Anyway it's possible have success in manual ( so hard for your brain in long term due stress ) and even in some degrees of self auto. Full auto is still pending goal because it depends of system flexibility. And it's difficult a mechanical system works as "random"
Try don't lose pants never...
  • #112
  • Nov 17, 2021 2:54am Nov 17, 2021 2:54am
Quoting ryuryu
{quote} Thank you for your reply. At least we can talk not about magic and feelings, but about math. Regarding to the probability and statistics. I know that my best trades are with XAU and from NY open + 1 hour. Worth trades are with GU and other pairs. It is statistics. I know that If I'm trading the trend the winrate is >50%, if both ways it is <50% and if against it is <35%. That is probability based on statistics. Also I know if the volume is huge, delta is green and the main trend (local) is bull then it is better to open only longs. That...
Okay -- for fun, let's see if we can carry out a civil conversation. Full disclosure -- we have a history and you are well-aware I have zero patience for your BS. So, this could devolve rather quickly. But, let's give it a try...

I claim trading is not a science, whereas you claim it is a science. I think this is an interesting (and controversial) topic worthy of discussion and probably fits within the boundaries of what the OP initially had in mind when he started the thread. But before beginning let's be upfront -- neither of us can ***prove*** that trading either is or is not a science. If you claim otherwise -- that is, that you can ***prove*** trading is an exact science, then we're done because I have no interest in conversing with ideologues.

Science is evidence-based. It is reproducible and provable. And often times it can be modeled mathematically. Take gravity as an example -- if I stand on a rooftop holding a rock and if I open my hand then we observe the rock falls downward. We can take the observation further -- this happens anywhere on our planet, on mountain tops and sea level. Furthermore, the science of physics and brilliant physicists of the past have developed EXACT mathematical formulas that describe this behavior. In fact, the mathematical formulas are now so advanced that we can describe the path of a projectile fired a thousand miles away to within a few inches of its ultimate destination. Trading has few, if any, elements of being a science -- if you disagree, then name 3 such elements. Rather, trading does require thinking and logic and attention to detail -- but that is not science. That is called "being a good detective"...
  • #113
  • Nov 17, 2021 3:04am Nov 17, 2021 3:04am
Quoting robots4me
{quote} Okay -- for fun, let's see if we can carry out a civil conversation. Full disclosure -- we have a history and you are well-aware I have zero patience for your BS. So, this could devolve rather quickly. But, let's give it a try... I claim trading is not a science, whereas you claim it is a science. I think this is an interesting (and controversial) topic worthy of discussion and probably fits within the boundaries of what the OP initially had in mind when he started the thread. But before beginning let's be upfront -- neither of us can ***prove***...
Exactly. But if 2+2=17.76 or/and stochastic show oversold areas then your rock must jump to the moon instead of falling to the ground.

So where I'm wrong? That 2+2=4, but not >17? That RSI/stoch are not showing oversold areas? That your support and resistance levels with no volume data used are pure bullshit? That repainting indicators are only good to sell mentoring on youtube? Where my mistake exactly?
Observer effect
  • #114
  • Nov 17, 2021 3:27am Nov 17, 2021 3:27am
Quoting ryuryu
{quote} Exactly. But if 2+2=17.76 or/and stochastic show oversold areas then your rock must jump to the moon instead of falling to the ground. So where I'm wrong? That 2+2=4, but not >17? That RSI/stoch are not showing oversold areas? That your support and resistance levels with no volume data used are pure bullshit? That repainting indicators are only good to sell mentoring on youtube? Where my mistake exactly?
Your mistake is that you don't understand the meaning of the word science. Your mind has such a high opinion of itself that it has convinced you that whatever it thinks must be right. In fact, not only must it be right, it must also be "science". But that's not science -- it's just your observations and from time-to-time you can find an algebraic expression that is consistent with your observations.

I think you confuse science with heuristics -- i.e. "rule of thumb". A heuristic is a rule (or set of rules) that we apply to an observation in the absence of science. We humans are motivated to explain the world around us. Science can explain a few things -- but it is far away from explaining everything. So, instead, we come up heuristics or "rules-of-thumb" that are "good enough" in an attempt to get by until someone more brilliant comes along and can actually develop our observations into a reproducible and provable science.

I don't even know if you are a profitable trader. But I do know profitable traders who do not trade like you. The fact there are profitable traders who do not trade like you is proof that your approach to trading is not science. That's not to say you don't have a valid approach -- just that it's your approach. If your approach works for you that does not make it science. If your approach includes elements of algebra again, that does not make it science. Including elements of algebra in your trading approach does not make trading an exact science.
  • #115
  • Edited 4:06am Nov 17, 2021 3:51am | Edited 4:06am
What you need to understand is that this is an ever changing market, and that no strategy will work forever. Trading business is not an easy business, and big banks and institutions pay loads of human resources to keep their strategies as audited and updated as possible.

So imagine, when all the work needs to be done by a retail trader. Your best chance is to focus on single market/currency pair. Then you need to find and edge for this specific market; This edge can be based on indicators, S/R, price action, candle formations, price patterns, news releases, twitter posts, temperature, sea levels, rain volume, humidity, or whatever shit you your brain can imagine, etc..

Once you find what you think is an edge, you need to backtest it, or trade it in a demo/small account, until you get enough trades to decide you have indeed found an edge.

You also need a clear strategy on trade management, meaning you need to have a very clear idea of when are you closing your positions totally or partially. T

Then you need to stick to your plan, and keep trading this single strategy; and also you need to keep a trading log, so that you know your strategy still has an edge. For example, if your strategy had a success rate of 60%, and after a few months you only have a 30%, this means market conditions have changed, so you need to reengineer your strategy or dump it and find a new one.

Also keep in mind that this strategy is only valid for the market you have tested, meaning, before trading any other market, you need to do all the logging work for the new market you want to trade.

Only when this strategy becomes subconscious to you, meaning, you have no feelings at all, you are just a robot on autopilot, you can start to search for new strategies/markets.

What most people don't understand is that trading is not a simple business.. It's requires a lot of work and auditing in order to be consistent.
  • #116
  • Edited 5:28am Nov 17, 2021 3:58am | Edited 5:28am
Quoting ryuryu
{quote} Exactly. But if 2+2=17.76 or/and stochastic show oversold areas then your rock must jump to the moon instead of falling to the ground. So where I'm wrong? That 2+2=4, but not >17? That RSI/stoch are not showing oversold areas? That your support and resistance levels with no volume data used are pure bullshit? That repainting indicators are only good to sell mentoring on youtube? Where my mistake exactly?
Just let me make an advice if you want not fall in common traps. Forget facts here. Stoch/rsi are not exhausted areas.

Its a common wrong read/understanding about how works tools. If you check in strong trends you will see they are long time there. How people can call exhausted to something moves hundreds pips after reach that area

You should try doubt about all when you are trying understand market. It happened something similar in EAX to other member. He believed csm tool is a strength meter and this is completely wrong from csm algorithm perspective.

Regards
Try don't lose pants never...
  • #117
  • Nov 17, 2021 5:46am Nov 17, 2021 5:46am
I just found how Edge found an Edge.

Inserted Video
  • #118
  • Nov 17, 2021 6:32am Nov 17, 2021 6:32am
Quoting robots4me
{quote} Your mistake is that you don't understand the meaning of the word science.
Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world.

It is not about feelings, hopes, praying to get out of bad trade. Science in trading is about math for sure.
Observer effect
  • #119
  • Nov 17, 2021 9:18am Nov 17, 2021 9:18am
Quoting ryuryu
{quote} Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world. It is not about feelings, hopes, praying to get out of bad trade. Science in trading is about math for sure.
"Science is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world."

@ryuryu -- and your trading is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the world??? Please elaborate. Where exactly does your organized knowledge exist? What are your testable explanations? What are your predictions?

Playing darts, driving a car, robbing a bank all involve some element(s) of math -- but I wouldn't consider those endeavers as science, even according to your definition above. @ryuryu -- you are one confused puppy...
  • #120
  • Nov 17, 2021 12:42pm Nov 17, 2021 12:42pm
Quoting bento2019
Here is what works for me and you can take it how you want it. Not financial advice what so ever. Price action is my leading indicator, my lagging indicator confirms my direction, price action is also my entry, my stop loss is based on the 1.5 ATR, I scale as my trades make profit. I have a good risk reward ratio. I trade the hourly chart and trend bias comes from the daily and I keep attacking it as my entries happen. I have a 100k account and my leverage is 2:1 and I keep 20 pip stop loss on over night trades and 1.5 ATR on my day time trades...

I forgot to add something. There are times where I go against the daily trend but I don't "bet" as much. For example, when I go against the trend, I don't put 2.0 lots on the table and risk my .4 percent. I put .5 lots on the table instead. If I am wrong, I lose a 100 dollars. Not a big deal to me. If I am right, I scrape 200-300 or so. I am not one to walk away from money. Your analysis better be good. For me, win rate is not as important as risk/reward. Like the other week. On scalping, I was like 40 percent win rate but still walk away from 70+ pips and that is scalping. Let your winners ride and cut your losses short. I have an exit indicator but If I am on profit, I use a 38.2 retracement on my fibonacci for scaling my trades so no matter what, I take a little profit. There is more to trading than learning some strategy. You have to take everything and I mean everything. Shit, I even draw harmonic at times. If its a 61 retracement I pay attention. If it's not, I delete the muhfucka off my charts. The one thing I have trouble on is the continuation trades. Sounds like it should be the easiest trades right? Some of you know what I am talking about. Continuations can mess with your price action analysis. I have helped yall a whole lot and this is probably one of the most informative comments on here because I hear a lot of bickering about math or something. If you guys can help me identify continuations, it is much appreciated. Thank you. BTW, I caught that sweet continuation on AUD CHF.
0 traders viewing now