Trading aud/nzd successfully | Page 93 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Milking 4 pairs AUD/NZD, EUR/GBP,NZD/CAD & AUD/CAD for a living 38 replies

Trading the Waves successfully- where and how! 0 replies

Anybody here successfully trading news? 61 replies

Movie clips for trading successfully 18 replies

Trading Successfully 27 replies

Attachments: Trading aud/nzd successfully
Exit Attachments

Trading aud/nzd successfully

  • #1,841
  • Jun 21, 2009 7:24am Jun 21, 2009 7:24am
I'll stay away from Thursday and Friday.
  • #1,842
  • Jun 21, 2009 12:08pm Jun 21, 2009 12:08pm
Wednesday Afternoon is the FOMC statement. If there are any changes you will see big market moves, however, there probably wont be any changes at this time. Also Bernanke is testifying Thurs morning and if he says something earth shattering the markets can move. Now what I mean by big market moves is they have the potential to go outside the range of the EA. The vast majority of news stories do not. Happy trading.
  • #1,843
  • Jun 21, 2009 1:43pm Jun 21, 2009 1:43pm
From my past experience I've found out that USD News
hardly get this pair to move 150 Pips in one direction without
retracing. I trade 10 Levels at the moment it probably won't hurt me.
GDP report for AUD (or was it NZD) is something different though.
  • #1,844
  • Jun 21, 2009 3:44pm Jun 21, 2009 3:44pm
Thanks guys, I'll keep demo running to keep learning and see the impact.
Still learning to fish,
Bob, thanks a Million Pips

Cheers

Donovan
  • #1,845
  • Jun 21, 2009 6:03pm Jun 21, 2009 6:03pm
Quoting Tjpld
From my past experience I've found out that USD News
hardly get this pair to move 150 Pips in one direction without
retracing. I trade 10 Levels at the moment it probably won't hurt me.
GDP report for AUD (or was it NZD) is something different though.
For the Aud/Nzd I dont see any big news stories for the week so there shouldnt be too much trouble for this pair. But I never trust Bernanke when he goes before congress. For some reason he can sneeze and the market move 100 pips.
  • #1,846
  • Jun 21, 2009 6:04pm Jun 21, 2009 6:04pm
Just to let you know that I am testing using Bollinger bands instead of fixed numbers. results have been mixed so far.
  • #1,847
  • Jun 21, 2009 7:12pm Jun 21, 2009 7:12pm
Quoting nanningbob
Just to let you know that I am testing using Bollinger bands instead of fixed numbers. results have been mixed so far.
are you using the standard 2 deviations (95% for those that have done statistics) or a custom number?
Grabbing the bull by the horns!
  • #1,848
  • Jun 22, 2009 1:21am Jun 22, 2009 1:21am
Quoting whitegoodman
are you using the standard 2 deviations (95% for those that have done statistics) or a custom number?
I am using a 40MA which gives you wider bands but not as wide as a 3 on a 20 MA. I like this number better. Still in the trial stages though but I like the idea of a non fixed level intro. something that adapts to market conditions some.
  • #1,849
  • Jun 29, 2009 5:43pm Jun 29, 2009 5:43pm
I hope everyone's trading is going well. I found out today that the new FIFO rules will be put in place in the new week or so. I wish I could say that this was an exciting time for US-based brokers, but sadly it would appear that they are becoming more of a bother than they are worth.

All the same to use the 1.0x trading method developed by Der strange some coding issues need to be put in place to comply with the new FIFO rules.

1) the first order's tp needs to be moved to the last orders tp so that it is the first one being hit on a take profit.

and

2) instead of the EA closing the rest of the orders from newest to oldest it needs to be from oldest to newest.

If any of your programmers out there can help me out with these coding problems I will be VERY grateful. The attached EA is the correct version that I am using right now and works perfectly, but sadly unless these changes get made this method will no longer be able to trade with US-based brokers.
Attached File(s)
File Type: mq4 Vertoauto5digitEAv2.2JT.mq4   30 KB | 398 downloads
  • #1,850
  • Jun 29, 2009 6:32pm Jun 29, 2009 6:32pm
2.) i think you have only change the line 352 from:

Quote
for(cnt=OrdersTotal()-1;cnt>=0;cnt--)

to:

Quote
for(cnt>=0;cnt=OrdersTotal()-1;cnt++)

1.) i think you have to pseudocode something like this:

if NewOrderOpen=true then modifiy TP of first order to Pips*OpenOrders+Takeprofit
  • #1,851
  • Jun 29, 2009 8:27pm Jun 29, 2009 8:27pm
regarding the 1.0x strategy, do all orders remain open for say 20 levels of 35x25 if their is no retrace? or does it close the first 4 levels and start again when it goes 100 deep? or does it make the later levels TP larger?
Grabbing the bull by the horns!
  • #1,852
  • Jun 29, 2009 11:59pm Jun 29, 2009 11:59pm
Quoting Verto
I hope everyone's trading is going well. I found out today that the new FIFO rules will be put in place in the new week or so. I wish I could say that this was an exciting time for US-based brokers, but sadly it would appear that they are becoming more of a bother than they are worth.

All the same to use the 1.0x trading method developed by Der strange some coding issues need to be put in place to comply with the new FIFO rules.

1) the first order's tp needs to be moved to the last orders tp so that it is the first one being hit on a take profit....
I am not sure what the heck this thing is about. Does this strike at the heart of multi-level trading. I often will close one position for profit which many times is my last trade in. What the heck is the reasoning behind this anyway? Is there anywhere we can get solid info on how this works first in first out. This is going to force me to go to a foreign trader if it is as bad as it sounds. I manually trade this way also not just with an EA.
  • #1,853
  • Jun 30, 2009 12:55am Jun 30, 2009 12:55am
Quoting nanningbob
I manually trade this way also not just with an EA.
That is the problem actually. We just won't be able trade martingale way manually. Atleast with EA we can set all positions to close at once simultaneously.
If we have to change brokers, where will we go for nano lot brokers? Only brokers are there like FxOpen or LiteForex..
"Put all your efforts in becoming effortless"
  • #1,854
  • Jun 30, 2009 4:02am Jun 30, 2009 4:02am
Quoting IamTHAT
That is the problem actually. We just won't be able trade martingale way manually. Atleast with EA we can set all positions to close at once simultaneously.
If we have to change brokers, where will we go for nano lot brokers? Only brokers are there like FxOpen or LiteForex..
Well I am ready to trade dimes so that opens the field to a lot of possibilities. Australian, Swiss and British companies. If this thing is as ugly as it seems I will write my congressman and the finance committes and ask them what the heck happened to free trade. These rules are not proteciting traders they are hurting their freedom to trade. See what happens.
  • #1,855
  • Jun 30, 2009 4:32am Jun 30, 2009 4:32am
I want everyone to understand that this is my best guess about the new regs. Dont take this as factual because I maybe wrong but it is the only thing that makes sense. I talked to an IBFX rep and tried toread between the lines but according to them this is what they said,

In theory the FIFO rule will only work on the trades that have same lot sizes on the same pair.

So my theory is this, that there have been trade disputes between traders and brokers about the number of trades entered. If someone has a 3 lot trade entered but it shows up twice and that is not what he wanted there is a dispute that could be an error or a disreputable dealer may do. There for to prevent this type of dispute if you want to enter a second sell or buy on a trade you cannot use the same lot size. You will have to increase or decrease it to show you wanted this second trade. Now for my multi level system this will not affect your trading in or out as long as each entry is a different lot size. So if you like trading the same lots size and do multilevel trading you will have to trade 3.1 or 2.9 on the next trade. As long as the lot size is not the same you will be able to trade normally. This is my best guess. Maybe Iam right maybe I am wrong. a

  • #1,856
  • Jun 30, 2009 4:40am Jun 30, 2009 4:40am
Quoting Tjpld
From my past experience I've found out that USD News
hardly get this pair to move 150 Pips in one direction without
retracing. I trade 10 Levels at the moment it probably won't hurt me.
GDP report for AUD (or was it NZD) is something different though.

Hi, Tjpld

what is you S/L and what is your min recommended equity, with 0.01?
the spreadsheet indicates $354

cheers

Donovan
  • #1,857
  • Jun 30, 2009 5:03am Jun 30, 2009 5:03am
Depends completely on your settings.
  • #1,858
  • Edited 8:11am Jun 30, 2009 5:06am | Edited 8:11am
Quoting Tjpld
Depends completely on your settings.
Hi

Default, other than levels
  • #1,859
  • Jul 1, 2009 2:08am Jul 1, 2009 2:08am
Quoting der stratege
2.) i think you have only change the line 352 from:



to:



1.) i think you have to pseudocode something like this:

if NewOrderOpen=true then modifiy TP of first order to Pips*OpenOrders+Takeprofit

Hmm.. I'm no coding expert so this mostly just flys over my head.

To NB... it seems to only be orders of the same lot size. With the multi level trading system things are dandy because they are different lot sizes. As far as this 1x step by step method goes the coding of the EA has to be changed. It really is sad because this method has proved to be just as profitable, (a little more profitable and less risky) than the multi increasing lot size level method.
  • #1,860
  • Jul 1, 2009 2:36am Jul 1, 2009 2:36am
one of my tradingfriend spoke with ibfx about the fifo rule to bypass this.

Quote
As for the FIFO rule, it will most likely go into effect in July, but there are ways around the ruling so that you can trade as you wish. At present, the rule is such that if you have five 1.00 lot EUR/USD buy orders, the first one that was opened needs to be the first one closed. However, a simple way around this ruling is to open the trades such that they all have different lot sizes. As an example, if you were going to open 3 trades of 1.00 lots each, you could instead open one trade of 0.99, one of 1.00 and a final of 1.01.

and...

Quote
these trades would still equal the 3.00 lot total, and would still be able to be closed in any order you wish. Also, if you do have multiple trades of the same lot size and same pair open, you could shave a fraction off of the first order opened (for example close 0.01 lots of an existing 1.00 lot trade) which would make the remaining trade 0.99 lots. This would then allow you to close a newer trade that was also 1.00 lots without disturbing the rest of the original trade

with this statement we could tweak the EA code to work with the new rule
16 traders viewing now