100% Win Math Grid Ea | Page 29 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Grid - New indicator that replaces chart grid 60 replies

Grid (not grid system) or horizontal lines indicator 6 replies

100% win grid EA 45 replies

Grid, Burst Grid, Grid Risk and Grid Profit 1 reply

Double Time Grid and Pip Grid 0 replies

Attachments: 100% Win Math Grid Ea
Exit Attachments

100% Win Math Grid Ea

  • #561
  • Edited Sep 28, 2009 1:57am Sep 27, 2009 11:52pm | Edited Sep 28, 2009 1:57am
@TradingViper

MAXSETENTRYCOUNT
From what i tested..i see there is no way to set the Viper Ea for 1 Sequence Set.
IF we set 1 in this setting.. It still will open 2 sets one after another..!

Its like how many more sets you want to open after the current set when ea is started/dropped!

Can this be corrected for single set use!
100 Fold Challenge->Interested? ->https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/32152
  • #562
  • Sep 29, 2009 9:31am Sep 29, 2009 9:31am
Quoting plasmapants
Hi Viper,


Its may sound like a strange one, but is it possible to have an input for the colour of the lines drawn on the chart for the b/s/tp levels. It should help me with identifying which grid is doing what when i'm running the doubleG system.


perhaps if the ea could draw a horizontal line on the chart every time it starts a new set at the starting price. (the colour of the line should be changeable)
I don't think that's very hard. I'll add that to the next minor version upgrade...
Viper
  • #563
  • Sep 29, 2009 10:14am Sep 29, 2009 10:14am
Hi Saint,

I did read your PM's and considered your comments/requests carefully (and still pondering...). As you noticed, I put some of your suggestions in the last release. Please find my embedded comments/replys.

Viper


Quoting forexsaint
Hello viper,
i dont know you read few pm's i sent to you or not (as no reply came as yet) But i put in a lot time into them.

ANy way some of those features are in here in v2. Will check out!
And yes... its relieving that put in the Meaning of each setting, in d code itself.
Any way i have following queries:

1) Settings INCREMENT
Increment=0 means auto computed"
If its 50% of ADR, Can we have a option in setting to set the %age of ADR?

Yes this can be done. I will make it a user defined percentage of the daily ATR[color=blue][font=Verdana]...
  • #564
  • Sep 29, 2009 10:17am Sep 29, 2009 10:17am
Saint,

I will investigate... I have not personally seen this, but I often don't run long enough or change parameters when a set is running...

Thanks.
Viper

Quoting forexsaint
@TradingViper

MAXSETENTRYCOUNT
From what i tested..i see there is no way to set the Viper Ea for 1 Sequence Set.
IF we set 1 in this setting.. It still will open 2 sets one after another..!

Its like how many more sets you want to open after the current set when ea is started/dropped!

Can this be corrected for single set use!
  • #565
  • Sep 29, 2009 10:23am Sep 29, 2009 10:23am
Can you see them ?

Quoting tradingviper
Saint,

I will investigate... I have not personally seen this, but I often don't run long enough or change parameters when a set is running...

Thanks.
Viper
  • #566
  • Sep 29, 2009 1:06pm Sep 29, 2009 1:06pm
yes ..your reply has some problems.
You accidently deleted the remaining post i think as in
http://www.forexfactory.com/showpost...&postcount=563

i can only read answer to 1st question there !

Kindly post again!
Regards
100 Fold Challenge->Interested? ->https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/32152
  • #567
  • Sep 30, 2009 6:14am Sep 30, 2009 6:14am
I'm not sure how to get FF not to truncate replys... I embedded my responses... Anyway, here you go.

1) Settings INCREMENT
Increment=0 means auto computed"
If its 50% of ADR, Can we have a option in setting to set the %age of ADR?

Yes this can be done. I will make it a user defined percentage of the daily ATR (Average True Range).

2) Setting : MinHourToStart and MaxHourToStart
What happens to logic of ea ..when a trading set is on (trades on) and time frame ends?
It will not open any more and let the current set end at TP of any side(except if some watermark/maxlot setting is on)?
am i right?

No. The time window only allows or inhibits a brand new trade set from starting. Once a trade set (grid) has started, none of the parameters in the "Entry Control" section of the parameters has any effect whatsoever.

3) Setting: UseVolatilityFilter
"If set true, trades will only be taken if the current prices of CURRENT CHART TIMEFRAME exceed volatility thresholds - Definition of volatility based on Bollinger Bands."

What Definition/rules have you put into this for initialization of a trade set?

It currently requires that the BB(24) difference (BBHi-BBLo) > 2 * ATR(24) AND that price exceeds the BB (hi or low) by 10 percent of the ATR;

I have not tested this at all ! I have not even turned it into an indicator to see how often it occurs or what price action looks like when it does occur. It is just a thought that occurred to me, seemed logical, and I threw it in. I meant to observe it and test it but still have not.

4)Setting : UseTrendFilter
"If set true, trades will only be taken if the current prices of CURRENT CHART TIMEFRAME appear to be trending based on some standard indicators"

What standard indicators you used for this and their settings?

Yes, both the trend and volatility, currently use the chart timeframe to determine the results. CCI(50), RSI(24), MAOpen(21), MAClose(21), MAHigh(55), MALow(55).
Uptrend : MAClose>MAOpen AND MAClose>MAHigh AND CCI >0 AND RSI>50
Downtrend: Same in opposite directions…

5) When we talk of Settings in point 3 and 4, I believe these settings only are a trigger for Start of trade set and Exit is purely based on logical math i.e hitting of TP on any side(except if some watermark/maxlot setting is on)... am i Right?

Yes. See comment above about Entry Control parameters.

6) Setting : MaxSetEntryCount
Though i think its like a modified"CONTINUE FUNCTIOn" of original Mgrid Ea, i would still like to confirm!
So within a tradeable time period, If say it is set to 2, EA will open 2 trading sets, one after another.. Right?
(of course if 1st one ends before the time period ends)

Yes.

7)Since the Water mark Settings are based of calculation of margin%age first and then Looking at profits and loss to "Close All trade"
Is there any chance of Adding Simple, MaxLoss and Max profit Settings ?
Which will help a lot when volatility goes down and markets start ranging after a bad entry and we want to Close Whole set based on parameter $Amount as Maxloss or MaxProfit as soon as they come into picture as Floating P/L?

I am not sure I understand what you are looking for. I left in ‘OpenLossToCloseTrades’ you could just set that if you perceive the market trending sideways. If something is successful however, I would prefer to automate it.

AND
Its not easy to do this... say if we use some scripts for this... What will happen to MaxSetEntryCount.
Does it automatically detect that one set is over ?

It resets after time window closes. So if you manually delete a set, the MaxSetEntryCount is unaffected. If only 1 set had run and you had the variable set to 2, another set would begin. If you deleted the second set, it would not start another until it exited and re-entered the time window.

8) Just like Point 3 and 4th Filters. Can you kindly add a ATR based Filter To it for initiation of trade set?
A setting for Atr value in Settings instead of some fixed 20 or 14 value will be lot better!
ATR should be based on the time frame the EA is dropped on (or that can also be added as a setting parameter- M1, M5, H1..etc)

Yes. I think I understand what you are looking for. My understanding is, you want to be able to pick the ATR period and then the size threshold so for example the ATR(14) >= 30 pips. Where the 14 and 30 are user settable parameters. If this is incorrect, let me know.
  • #568
  • Sep 30, 2009 2:49pm Sep 30, 2009 2:49pm
Thanks for replies Tviper

Regarding Point 7, i again want to confirm... In case we use Close order scripts for loss or profits (closing a trade set)
Does the Max entery Count will count/identify that closure as Close of one set . I hope it does!

YES, kindly do look into that problem of MaxSetEntryCount =1. It should mean , it allows opening of one set only..but it allows 2 in total.

Regarding Point 8,
Yes u understood it right, i want to try this as a filter for initiation of a set !
i have tested Current ATR based Initiation manually and its promising!
NOTE ..i think it shd have a TF parameter too in setting along with no. of bars (14 for eg.) and no. of pips (>=30 for eg.). BCOZ ea can be run on any TF..so this filter will be different if charts(with ea on it) opened are of different TF.


Further, if you can tell us with basic idea, what and where the changes you do, when u add a new filter in code ( ofcourse showing us the code edits here), We can try various type of filters ourselves instead of requesting you time and again...and saving ur time.

Another feature Request :
I have been liking/testing mostly LEVEL 2 grids only.. IMO level 3 is more difficult to control (prone to Death trade) esp in constricted range !

NoW this can be tricky to code. But Think of this as a Another very good Risk mitigation Strategy !
Consider Level 2 Grid only for understanding plz.
Can there be any way , where after a group of whipsaws at level 1,
another logic comes into picture and stops order opening at opposite level 1, when triggered. See the attached pic
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: LEVEL 2.JPG Size: 17 KB


Blue dots are Order Triggering Spots.
They are 5 times in Buy level 1 and 5 times in Sell level 1.
Now say after 5 (Equal number)Whipsaws on each side , Ea Stops placing orders at 1st level and continues with level 2 only and lets the price whipsaw
(Ea can check the number of whipsaws by Watching how many times Buy/Sell Stop Price of level 1 orders gets triggered in tandom with opposite side...or whatver way you feel better)

Now you will think, as in the picture, price is right now in sell zone..so if ea Didnt place pending orders on Buy level 1 (on this last 5th sell level 1 whipsaw) Math will get changed as normally more orders (lot size based) shd be placed at buy level 1 also along with buy level 2

Solution can be... at 5th Whipsaw (or after whatever number of whipsaw we need) , Instead of placing Pending orders at Buy Level 1. Place Double the size of same no of orders at Buy level 2 ( Of course along with its own due orders as per normal math logic).
Double becoz math will be same to produce same profits when TP will get hit bcoz distance between Buy level 1 to Buy level 1 (increment) is Equal to Distance from Buy level 2 to TP
So Doubling the orders will be like orders were placed at Buy level 1 only,as far a Results are concerned!

Hope you got my Idea..Think abt it... May be by this week end..you can come up with this!
You can come up with a MutantViper grid ea (level 2 based only version)..if you dont want this in normal series of version.
also think it will more difficult for implementing in level 3 grid (..more coding and stuff)

Looking forward
Regards
100 Fold Challenge->Interested? ->https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/32152
  • #569
  • Oct 1, 2009 2:33am Oct 1, 2009 2:33am
Hi Guys,

I've been testing vGrid2.1 and it seems that there is still a problem with the math and inaccurate orders being placed. Seems to ignore placing orders at some levels all together. I've tried it with both the the order (not so) reliable function turned on and off. (viper suggested this may be the cause).

The best way to test is to run mGrid and vGrid side by side.

I'd like to know if anyone else is testing and noticing the same thing. Having all the extra features is great, but the're rendered useless unless the math works.

For those of you who have been asking, I am only using the orignal mGrid (math is great but can throw pending orders all over the place during times of volatility) and vGridv1 (with default settings (dodgy math if u use other then default lot size)) for my live trading.
bull in a china shop
  • #570
  • Edited 5:27am Oct 1, 2009 2:37am | Edited 5:27am
Some general thoughts.

On martingale: The mGrid method is a martingale/hedge method. What that means is that if you have enough equity, when a breakout occurs, you will live to tell the tale. In trading any martingale method you have to accept the fact that you are risking the whole of your capital account. You've got to see every sequence to the end. If you cant risk it, don't trade a martingale method.

On risk mitigation: When i first started trading several years ago, i took a trade which was going against me and slowly approaching my sl. Speaking with a fellow trader i talked about killing it. So he reviewed the reasons for the trade and placing the sl and then gave me some wise words which i've often repeated. He said 'When you took the trade the loss was probable, now your thinking of killing it the loss has become possible, if you kill it taking the loss is inevitable.'

Ponder on it a while. Having a high/low equity watermark (although i'm not completely against this idea as long as the low watermark is big), changing the math half way through a sequence, deleting orders or closing opened orders before a sequence has closed is all turning the probability of loss in to an inevitability of loss.

On the issue of using indicators to determine a trend: They take a long time to master because you need to allign the price action to what the indicator is saying. This is only something that can be done with the human eye (in my budget). So having a trend filter does not guarantee a trend, and you could still find yourself stuck in a rangebound movement.
bull in a china shop
  • #571
  • Oct 1, 2009 5:49am Oct 1, 2009 5:49am
Thanks Trading Viper for all your work with this EA. Im glad to see it still alive with different possibilities and ideas.

As we all know the death trade will happen eventually. There has been time and effort applied trying to avoid it but i personallly don't think it can be avoided. More effort needs to be placed on how to reverse the situation or come out with a small/resonable loss when the enevitable does occur.

I do like what ForexSaint suggested. If there was a way to modify the high water mark to stop trading after 'x' percent of equity has been consumed and balance the buys and sells. This way we have gone as far as we are prepared to go and will take a loss. The loss will be known due to knowing the amount of open lots and the distance between the buy and sell pending orders.

I also agree with what Plasmapants has said. The math on your EA is different to Mgrid. I have run both side by side and mgrid seems to be more favourable/profitable in the long run with the same settings. Can't really explain it but maybe there is a fundamental error with the calculations within the viper EA.
Luck is where preparation meets opportunity.......
  • #572
  • Oct 1, 2009 9:19am Oct 1, 2009 9:19am
has anyone here looked at the burger king hedge to go to his ratio of 1.1 to 1 instead of going 3 to 1 like mgrid v7? just curious...you would get more room for the death trade to be avoided
  • #573
  • Oct 1, 2009 9:44am Oct 1, 2009 9:44am
7. Yes it does, as you hope !
8. Got it.

As for the rest... it is an interesting idea, we would have to carefully work out the math to make sure we will get understood results in various (all) circumstances. What if level 2 gets too many swings? If you can do that and it shows profitable, then we can consider trying to code it.

Viper

Quoting forexsaint
Thanks for replies Tviper

Regarding Point 7, i again want to confirm... In case we use Close order scripts for loss or profits (closing a trade set)
Does the Max entery Count will count/identify that closure as Close of one set . I hope it does!

YES, kindly do look into that problem of MaxSetEntryCount =1. It should mean , it allows opening of one set only..but it allows 2 in total.

Regarding Point 8,
Yes u understood it right, i want to try this as a filter for initiation of a set !
i have tested Current ATR based Initiation...
  • #574
  • Oct 1, 2009 9:54am Oct 1, 2009 9:54am
Plasma,
Thanks for bringing this to my attention...

I have not seen this, but I have not put lots of hours in testing either. I have to say I find it surprising and a little baffling since I really have not "changed the math" part of the code at all. I have simply added lots of bells and whistles. I will try to add additional debug code and let it run a while and see if I can catch this occuring.

Can you identify under what circumstances it seems to skip an order ? Is it still related to lot size or something else ?

Unfortunately, when the markets are open, I have the least time to run and analyze issues. It is hard to forward test on weekends :-)

Viper

Quoting plasmapants
Hi Guys,

I've been testing vGrid2.1 and it seems that there is still a problem with the math and inaccurate orders being placed. Seems to ignore placing orders at some levels all together. I've tried it with both the the order (not so) reliable function turned on and off. (viper suggested this may be the cause).

The best way to test is to run mGrid and vGrid side by side.

I'd like to know if anyone else is testing and noticing the same thing. Having all the extra features is great, but the're rendered useless unless the math works.

For those...
  • #575
  • Oct 1, 2009 10:00am Oct 1, 2009 10:00am
Plasma,

I agree and the reasoning is sound. I just wanted to point out, that currently, the low water mark escape can be set to a low percentage of margin (15% maybe), because it does not interfere with the math at all. It will continue to place new trades and operate normally. It only exits everything at the first sign of profit. I have seen this work because I was running another EA at the same time as VGrid and the other had many positions opened, so VGrid exited for a profit (breakeven really) before reaching TP/SL.

Viper

Quoting plasmapants
Some general thoughts.

On martingale: The mGrid method is a martingale/hedge method. What that means is that if you have enough equity, when a breakout occurs, you will live to tell the tale. In trading any martingale method you have to accept the fact that you are risking the whole of your capital account. You've got to see every sequence to the end. If you cant risk it, don't trade a martingale method.

On risk mitigation: When i first started trading several years ago, i took a trade which was going against me and slowly approaching my sl....
  • #576
  • Oct 1, 2009 10:09am Oct 1, 2009 10:09am
Hi Ozzie,

I was trying to do just what you suggested with the High-Water mark. I deleted all pending orders and started taking profits on individual positions that were profitable. Hoping to close out as many positions as possible with a profit (by future whipsawing) and thereby reduce (or eliminate if they all closed this way) the loss. Unfortunately, in back testing, it did not work out that well.

I agree that this is where more effort needs to be. Entry filters may delay the inevitable, but it is still inevitable. The "Death Trade" will occur.

ForexSaint said you were working on your own EA version of this with a friend. How did that work out ? Please post if it works.

Viper

Quoting Ozzie Taz
Thanks Trading Viper for all your work with this EA. Im glad to see it still alive with different possibilities and ideas.

As we all know the death trade will happen eventually. There has been time and effort applied trying to avoid it but i personallly don't think it can be avoided. More effort needs to be placed on how to reverse the situation or come out with a small/resonable loss when the enevitable does occur.

I do like what ForexSaint suggested. If there was a way to modify the high water mark to stop trading after 'x' percent of equity...
  • #577
  • Oct 1, 2009 10:11am Oct 1, 2009 10:11am
I have never heard of the Burger King hedge. Please describe it in more detail or post a link where a good description exists.

Thanks.
Viper

Quoting rbrtsha
has anyone here looked at the burger king hedge to go to his ratio of 1.1 to 1 instead of going 3 to 1 like mgrid v7? just curious...you would get more room for the death trade to be avoided
  • #578
  • Oct 1, 2009 10:21am Oct 1, 2009 10:21am
Version 2.2 is almost done. Should be able to post tomorrow.

It does NOT fix the apparent "math problem" since I thought that was fixed and have not personally seen it since. (Sorry about that guys I will try to track it down. Don't want to waste time on an EA that is not useful. Please, if you have any details as to when this occurs, please share)

It does draw lines at the pivot and every level per plasmapants request with user settable colors (this was trickier than it should have been).
It does add ATR (user defined levels) entry filter
It does fix the SetCount bug so if you tell it to do only one set, it should no longer allow 2
It does contain a special surprise for ForexSaint - don't ask !!
Hopefully tomorrow,

Viper

It does seem interest in this thread has waned considerably...
  • #579
  • Edited Oct 2, 2009 6:13am Oct 1, 2009 10:36am | Edited Oct 2, 2009 6:13am
Quote
As for the rest... it is an interesting idea, we would have to carefully work out the math to make sure we will get understood results in various (all) circumstances. What if level 2 gets too many swings? If you can do that and it shows profitable, then we can consider trying to code it.

Phew! Thanks God, i was able to explain with that pic!
See Tviper... i am really specific abt that idea on Level 2 only (reason said before) and even would advise preparing a level 2 based EA only(for testing first),if you think so!

CONCISE FORM of IDEA: After a Specifc No. of Whipsaws of price at level 1 , we will just be placing, Double the size of, same no of orders which shd be placed on level 1 AT level 2. Thats it!

As regarding math.. see if you really read that again, we are just not changing math.
You see profitability will remain Same ... Just that We are cutting Down Whipsaws at level 1 and also the no. of orders to half and stationing them at periphery of Grid!

AIM : What exactly are we doing is not allowing price to Whipsaw us to death in small range and Open orders only when probabaility of hitting TP either side is more.
I hope everybody will easily agree... Probability of price moving from level 2 price level to TP is Double to that from Level 1 to TP , Either side !

As you said, level 2 can also get whipsawed after this logic has been working .
YES it will... But think, we have a lot more advantages... we are Doing 2 Gr8 things !

1) We are Stopping all Future whipsaws after a no. of trades !
Yes at level 1 Only (Thats a gr8 thing if one is trading 2 level grid, bcoz Grid Size overall is Small, when levels are less, esp Small Increments)
2) Pondering again, you will find, We are almost making the future no. of Whipsaws to half (& thus trades & thus Margin Requirement & thus Chances of Margin Fully used up/Death trade) , bcoz if price level say keeps whipsawing, it will only be triggering 2nd level only.
Normally, If the level 1 keeps whipsawing, it will mount so many orders at both opposite level 1 and level 2. All Those Extra whipsaw orders can be prevented, If Price keeps whipsawing in small range of level 1 only and then breaks out taking level 2 and and then TP !
The POINT 2 is more important.. which i forget to stress in last post!

OVERALL... This is nothing more.... Than Converting a level 2 Grid to 1 level grid after a no. of whipsaws of level 1 price level, Still keeping the profits of a Level 2 Grid
Its a QUITE promising way to kind of, Halving the speed of ea towards Death Trade IMO. Its like having more odds in our favour and Getting more time for price to reach out TP , with less whipsawing!

SO The EDGE is , PROBABILITY of price moving from level 2 to Tp is Double than from level 1 to TP, SIMPLE!

STILL , Remember, if EA is not started at Right time , our Grid Range i.e TP's will not placed at appropriate Reachable levels, (of course starting and trading this Ea is experience)
level 2 Price orders will also get Whipsawed !


Quoting tradingviper
Version 2.2 is almost done. Should be able to post tomorrow......
It does contain a special surprise for ForexSaint - don't ask !!

waiting eagerly !

Quote
It does seem interest in this thread has waned considerably...
Not for me at least !
100 Fold Challenge->Interested? ->https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/32152
  • #580
  • Oct 1, 2009 5:39pm Oct 1, 2009 5:39pm
I really like the idea of the low/high water mark. To me its finally a start on really trying to deal with the death trade. So far it isn't too successful (my bad) but it is a start and hopefully can progress to a better solution.

With the 'taking profits on individual positions' ...... in theroy it sounds good and does work if it whipsaws back and hits TP in the other direction. If it doesn't !!BOOM!! goes the account in a quick and heart beaking fashion.

I don't really have any ideas at this time but would like to get brains ticking on it with this notion:-

I don't believe that any simple solution will get you out of the death trade. Once you %equity reaches the high water level, you need to start to reverse engineer the entire trade to completely minimise the difference between the buys and the sells. It will be more complicated than it seems but certainly belive more time and effort needs to be focused just on this area. We know martingale won't lose (thats half the battle done). The math is the same throughout no matter how you use it...

IDEA: Just popped into my head (with the help of FS previous post)

When you do reach you maximum % risk. Obviously one side will be more weighted than the other (lets say the buys in this case). If it reverses (here comes the death trade), do as previously done and kill all pending orders. Once it reaches the 'sells' kill off 'X' lots of buys to level the difference between the buys/sells. So when it does eventually hit the TP level (either side), your loss will only be the distance between the 1st levels buys/sell multiplied by the lot size openend AND what you previously close to level the buys/sells.

Hope that makes sense. Im just really trying to focus on minimising the loss as much as possible when it is out of control. It will mean you take a loss but who cares. It's all part of this game. As long as the loss is small and you have more wins than losses (with martingale you know you should) then there isn't a reason you won't come out ahead.
Luck is where preparation meets opportunity.......
3 traders viewing now