100% Win Math Grid Ea

2. Yes, the current chart TF
3. No problem, thanks for noticing
4. Have been giving it thought on best way to proceed - have a few ideas
5. OK, next release
6. Agreed
Viper

Reply's to your post...
1. Not sure about the "slow closing bug" - will have to investigate
2. I removed the 10 sec delay for next release. I put it in so if you wanted to delete a grid manually, a new one would not start instantly, but would give you a few seconds. If using big increments (longer term), it would not make any difference, but for small increments and fast moving markets it does. So I removed that delay completely.
3. Good.
4. Should be applied to the next grid to start and have no bearing on current grid execution.
Viper

- Do not know why this thread gets posted around end of week only?
- Why people around cannot share their views?
- There are lot many things to discuss regarding enteries/entry points, even when we cannot really control exits! aint it?
- There are lot manythings to be discussed about Increments! aint it?
- There are lot many things which can be discussed for "Which Pairs to trade"! aint it?
- There are lot many things to be discussed about times to trade! aint it?

Still this thread seeks new ea's!
I hope more and more poeple join in and put forward their views and experiences if any(or if they can/want to)

Regards

Thanks but i thing u forget to answer on this
lol i seem to be asking too much
This can be like this
- We enter the price level of the pair we want to trade in settings
- Drop the ea on that pair.
- EA will wait for the Bid to hit that price level and start the set . ELSE keeps on waiting!
- TP hits.
- NOW to be logical, for 2nd set, it should not wait for same price and should continue as normal if maxsetcount is >1.
BCOZ if someone really is interested in Price based Set opening, He will definitely set MaxSetCount to 1 only and will start/drop ea again with new level based on his best entry criteria. Hope i am clear in my explanation.
- Better a Boolean switch along with the price setting in the EA parameters would be easy for who dont want to trade this way
BUT as i see it, imo... Dropping the ea when our price level comes wont be better than Entering your price level and waiting for it to hit and ea to all else. Latter would be far quicker imo !

So i think coding it wont be that difficult, it can be in the start of order logic..
Like -
If PriceLevelToEnterFilter = True & PriceLevelToEnter =Bid ..
THEN set initialPrice=PriceLevelToEnter and
THEN Ordersend
ELSE computeSessionStats (at current price level) and Move on i.e. OrderSend as per normal logic




TIA
Regards

Lol....If someone cracks the math in this not only he would be millionare, but he would also probably get a Nobel prize!
I dont want to be rude, but you guys are chasing a wild
goose here.....all you do is wasting your time for something that cant be done. Death trade is around next corner no matter what!
...... but anyway, if someone succeds in this award winning math riddle,
dont forget about me....

Regards

I must ADMIT im a little lost but the idea seems great ,

there are a couple of questions id like to ask
does the ea take in the trading range and increasing or decreasing volatility?

the increment lot size seems to be based on position averaging, does these lot size increments take into account the trading range and volatility?

the reason i ask these questions is i do a simular hedging manualy and have so far a very good success LIVE TRADING

with balance of long and sell orders with position averaging which takes into account the above and trend direction

while manual has an advantage of timed entries and the ability to balance short and long orders to the trend

the big advantage i find is you are able to control the draw down size to your prefered limit

i can see from my brief testing in demo your idea has great potential

sorry for the above question but i am just a new commer to this thread and lack yet the full comprehension of the system and the ea

but manually im enjoying quite succesful results live trading the forex using same currency hedging for 100% hit rates

and using now also a manual live version with some apparent simularitys to your grid ea system

thank you so much for sharing with us

from BRIAN

Hi forexsaint!
I agree with you regarding price entry. I think it will be very useful to have that option, and perhaps have more than one price option, one for the upper side of the current price and one for the lower side.


Thanks

WCG

It has been cracked..do not worry! Yes, without a noble prize.Yes this MAY BE or MAY BE IS is a wild goose chase to get mileage out of this, without risking the shirt, But MAY be this waste of time can be an exception. One man's testing n Ideas can never equal those of many others if they have same aim. hope you agree on this atleast.
BEST Regards
P.S. hope you are enjoying Trade101 stuff.


Basic EA didn't. But latest Version of Viper Ea does have Flexible ATR based START(Only START) of Trading set (1 minimum). Start bcoz its like A bullet fired from a revolver in an infinite space with many people.We can Fire it but cannot Stop it. Stop will be only when Bullet hits someone i.e TP hits or if bullet falls down ttravelling too much i.e all Margin used up. OR Some basic Risk Mitigation(already put into Viper Ea) was already Switched on to save some bucks, in case some %ge margin is used up (flexible, to be entered in settings).
STOP is what we are trying to better deal with in case things get worse, due to ranging market shit. (RANGING is a relative term here as 10-20pip range can be really F**king for 10pip Increment Grid (level 2) and same can be no worries for a 25pip increment Grid.
Constricting the Grid increment to as small as possible is a way to Make probability of Hitting TP higher, but with disadvantage of speeding up towards death trade due to too many orders, in case market starts ranging in that Grid range i.e. within Full range =2*(Adjusted1stIncrement+increment+TPAdjustedIncrement) for Level 2 Trading
Lot size increments based on Basic math logic of ea and not controlled by us. You can only control the starting lot size.

In my earlier days i have gone through your strategy ..i liked it..yes thats some how can be called manual stuff.. But to be frank i thought it to be too complex for to be traded manually(sorry i may be dumb) But i liked it the 100% winners in your case. Still your method needs quite a capital i think.
but i liked it and even downloaded videos uploaded by you those days

yes this has potential but this Viper can bite the feeder(Trader) if market doesn't let it run and makes it stand (ranging markets)
Try out the basic version of EA a few times and then the latest version of ViperEA, with various settings, you will get to know basically how it works.
and Yes, kindly do not trade 1 lot size as starting lot size on a 10million demo account. Results if good will blow you off and then your live account if you try to do so (i know a senior member like you wont do that, just!). This thing is not that easy as it appears. Entry/Start of EA , the price level where you start it... are TOO important to do not take care.
After you get all the info about it..i would like you to share your experience of your manual grid method to be applied in EA, if any.
Best of luck. Regards




I do not know what you mean by upper and lower side. But i feel Single Price level setting for entry is enough for the requirement to fulfill i.e "Entry based on Specific price level"
Regards

[quote=forexsaint;3135981]I do not know what you mean by upper and lower side. But i feel Single Price level setting for entry is enough for the requirement to fulfill i.e "Entry based on Specific price level"
Regards


I don't know if we are on the same page here, but if you want to start the grid at a specific price level then you know that the price can move up or down from the current price. If the current price is 1.4700 and you want to start the grid at 1.4750, if the price move down then you miss the entry.

I do not know for what purpose you require a price level based grid starting Bcoz as i said before in my Post 604 it helps in mainly automating and fast start of grid orders, when you use such feature, as EA would definitely take less time THAN when that price comes> we see> and drop the EA > and then EA starts placing grid orders.In latter case, grid may start at some other level than where we dropped it, if market moves away from that price in those few seconds thus losing the edge for start of grid at that level.

What i think you want to do is , you dont want EA to start now,but start at some higher level or some lower level. That's imo won't help as this carries no edge until those higher and lower level itself carry some importance.Else there is no point waiting for grid to start. We can start it right now with no difference in randomness. Further if you really think...price will moving down or up from a price point, you should not wait... but start the grid at same point only. It would either hit the TP on buy side or sell side with least whipsaws in such scenarios.
Purpose here is to start the grid where Price will be at stretched extremes of a range. The level of price where you think markets will not be stagnant and we damn care where it moves from there....but the Viper should move atleast approx half the Total Grid Size from there to hit any TP. Thats all we need!
Hope you are getting the idea behind the purpose of Price level.

" if the price move down then you miss the entry" If you are trying to think of this ea as SET and Forget stuff...... i fear ! This is a "Viper" EA. do not fiddle it like this..."if not this than that" except demo.

If you are still not getting what i mean.
Run this EA when Price is at
-Important Trendlines
-Important Supports
-Important Resistances
-Important Breakout levels
-Important breakdown levels
-Important Pattern break levels
-Previous Days high
-Previous Days Low
-Previous Weeks High
-Previous Weeks Low
You will see probability of price moving from that Place is lot better than around some arbitrary level, condition being whats your increment is and what that level means really to market, what pair you are trading, etc.
I hope that was quite a food of thought.

Regards

Finished testing vGrid ver2.2

Math works fine on default lot size.

Math does not place pending orders correctly when you use 'min lot size'. It seems to place 1 set of pending orders on the opposite side when b2 is hit.

Used alpari demo for testing. increment 25 pips.


Viper, it would be great if this could be fixed for the next version.

Hi Viper,

Could you do a version of the grid with just the following features (removing everything else).


Magic no
Lot size (manual input of lot size only)
Increment
Levels
Tp adjust
Grid colour (just one colour for all lines on grid)
Comment (use this text in the 'comments' field instead of the starting price)

When 1 set closes we need the new set to start (by placing new pending orders) on the basis of the price of the last closed set.


fyi, I have been running double and triple grids live now for a few weeks. I have found that this approach seems to limit risk (risk mitigation ) in that if one grid is going against you, the 2nd and even 3rd may be going in your favour, so you have more hedged buy and sell positions in close proximity to each other. This limits the -ve equity. You also get nice steady closes throughout the day. The only problem i've had has been software related, when a set closes as a result of a spike, so a new grid starts with the same pending orders as one already running, so messing up the multi grid model. (the memory thing should fix this me thinks).

guys, no kidding, this could be the holy grail.

forexflash: nice to see you're still keeping an eye on us padawans.

Hey Guys,

How is everyone going? Not much to update at this stage. Im still trying to program what i need and making some progress. Just thought i would check in and keep this thread alive.

Thanks Plasma for your updates. Keep them coming buddy, nice to hear success stories in any shape or form

Cheers to Viper for adding his programmable skills to this thread. We are very fortunate to have you here and hope you will be back with more updates and ideas.

I have noticed quite alot of interest in this thread, but nobody wants to contribute. Any members who are here, please add your 2 cents worth. This is a team effort and requires as such.

One favour i do ask is that all EA's and adjustments (by viper) are done on his own back. We give him scores of requests and generally he comes through. Please be a little patient and try not to bombard him with requests.

Cheers guys

I tried this on a 100k demo, worked ok for the first day, it made like 83% using the MM... the next day, it blew the entire 183k out of the water.

This bot dont work properly.

if(SellGoalProfit<ProfitTarget)
// - Increment Lots Sell
{
for(cpt=LEVELS;cpt>=1 && SellGoalProfit<ProfitTarget;cpt--)
{
if(Bid>=(InitialPrice-(cpt*INCREMENT-MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_STOPLEVEL))*Point))
{
ticket=OrderSend(Symbol(),OP_SELLSTOP,cpt*LOTS,InitialPrice-cpt*INCREMENT*Point,2,BuyGoal+spread*Point,SellGoal+spread*Point,DoubleToStr(InitialPrice,MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_DIGITS)),MAGIC,0);
}
if(ticket>0) SellGoalProfit+=LOTS*(InitialPrice-cpt*INCREMENT*Point-SellGoal-spread*Point)/Point;
}
}


modified to:


if(SellGoalProfit<ProfitTarget)
// - Increment Lots Sell
{
for(cpt=LEVELS;cpt>=1 && SellGoalProfit<ProfitTarget;cpt--)
{
ticket = 0;
if(Bid>=(InitialPrice-(cpt*INCREMENT-MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_STOPLEVEL))*Point))
{
ticket=OrderSend(Symbol(),OP_SELLSTOP,cpt*LOTS,InitialPrice-cpt*INCREMENT*Point,2,BuyGoal+spread*Point,SellGoal+spread*Point,DoubleToStr(InitialPrice,MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_DIGITS)),MAGIC,0);
}
if(ticket>0) SellGoalProfit+=LOTS*(InitialPrice-cpt*INCREMENT*Point-SellGoal-spread*Point)/Point;
}
}

what was the bug? what did it fix?

Hey Ozzie, are you live with the grid or still testing. GU has been fantastic this week. Lost count of the number of closes i've had.

I agree with you. Its great to have talented programmers on board with this project. Also thinking about what Saint said, (once the math is sorted on vGrid), this forum could really move forward with analysing different pairs and potential setups/price levels to run the grid from.

For now, i am running two, three and four grids on gu at the same time as the opportunity presents itself. 3 levels, 25-30pip increment. Each grid is spaced out bringing a tp level closer to the price so i dont get knocked in a range.

Bob, its not the bot, its what you do with it that counts

wp, what is the bug fixing? is it the math problem by any chance. heres to hoping.

Not live with it yet. I am waiting to finish my mods before i test it vigorously. I like to be as thorough as possible (probably going to be my downfall too)

I got burnt badly when the financial crisis hit when i was trading Australian options. Since then, i have a complete new respect for intense MM (then why am i playing with martingale and risk/reward/

To begin with i like to focus strictly on the negatives of any project. Ofcourse here there are plenty but i do love a challenge and time will tell. Will provide feedback once im up and running.

With a bit of luck, would like to be trading this live soon. Im concentrating on the E/U ONLY at this stage... then will move to the U/J. Spread is a main concern and i need it as low as possible.

Im definately making progress, it's just a slow process.

Im am curious on how you implement you various grids. When do you decide to start grid 2 / 3 / 4 ??

Do you wait till you reach a DD level? Or is it more a technical reason (double tops/bottoms, pin bars etc)

Let's say I'm using a grid with 3 levels and 25 pip increment. Tp is 100 pips from the pivot. Price moves up 30 pips so I start second grid. Price goes up another 30 so I stArt 3rd grid. If the price reverses I am never more than 100 pips from tp.

I don't recomend using eu though. Not volatile enough. Gu and ey tend to be best with reasonable spread.

Try it on demo and you'll quickly realise the potential.

What mods are you having made to the grid?

Nice.... obviously it has been working out for you. Good to see!

I chose the EU not only for it's low spread, but because of the lack of volatility (when compared to EJ/GJ/GU etc). I like testing in the worse (well almost) case scenarios and take it from there. I search for areas that this EA (and its predecessors) fail miserably and look for solutions. If i do accomplish that goal, then i back test a few months.... then forward test if still successful.