NEW MT5 Seriously Stuffed For Traders Platform | Page 12 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Canadian traders, u guys are seriously lucky with taxes 10 replies

How to Access your Metatrader Platform MT4/MT5 Remotely 5 replies

Reliable and Stable Broker with MT5 platform 3 replies

Seriously, how I can GBP/USD go, is anything possible? 1 reply

Seriously, do forex systems have to be so complex? 11 replies

Attachments: NEW MT5 Seriously Stuffed For Traders Platform
Exit Attachments

NEW MT5 Seriously Stuffed For Traders Platform

  • #221
  • Oct 27, 2009 9:06am Oct 27, 2009 9:06am
Quoting enivid
We made a sell trade but it didn't open a sell position.
Exactly you didn't counter trade by opening a new position.

Counter trend trading is NOT the same as closing a position. Otherwise you would not be considered to be trading the counter trend would you. You would be simply closing the trending trade.

It is obvious that you are thinking like a trend trader only. Putting on the counter trend hat, will allow you to realise that counter trend trading is actually opening a position in that direction. Maybe the picture will tell you what you are looking for.

Quoting enivid
If we'd opened a sell position. The result would be completely different. And the total resulting profit would also have been 50 pips higher
(in MT5 with 3 separate positions over the entire time frame). However, in a losing scenario of the sell position the trader would be down purple * amount of pips as shown in post 200.

Quoting enivid
As I have already stated above, it's not necessary to open another SELL position after you closed your BUY position with a SHORT trade.
Then you wouldn't be counter trend trading.

Quoting enivid
Actually in all trading platforms (including MT4 and MT5) spread is counted as paid only when the position is closed (fully or partially).
Yes but the real point of this topic is, that not all platforms require you to close a buy position to open a separate sell position on the one currency MT4 doesn't require it. Hence MT4 is better than MT5.

Multiposition MT4 still allows you to have one position if you want.

But single position MT5 does not allow you to have multiple positions.

Put simply this is a loss of functionality. Why would you want to trade with a lesser platform?


Quoting enivid
That's quite irrelevant to the given example as 1) we don't open SELL position and 2) pending orders don't affect the resulting spreads paid - only the amount of closed positions matter.
By not opening a SELL position we have gone back to you needing to put on the counter trend trader hat, as opening a sell position in this case is what a counter trend trader does.

Secondly those pending positions can and one will become an open market position so they are not irrelevant.

What you are demonstrating is what I have also said towards the beginning, is that for the counter trend trader MT5 adds to the complexity for the trader.
Attached Image(s) (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: MT5 Requirements.jpg Size: 111 KB
Click to Enlarge Name: MT4 Requirements.jpg Size: 93 KB
  • #222
  • Oct 27, 2009 9:16am Oct 27, 2009 9:16am
Yes your algebraic logic is correct if you miss a position in MT5.

Talking in lots is easier to understand.

MT5
1+1+1=3 sell lots.
1+1+1=3 buy lots.

MT4
1+1= 2 sell lots.
1+1= 2 buy lots.

Simple easy to understand... Look at the above pictures and you'll see what I mean. If I can be bothered I will put the algebraic statements in later.

All the best to you 7bit.
  • #223
  • Oct 27, 2009 9:17am Oct 27, 2009 9:17am
Quoting aquaart
Counter trend trading is NOT the same as closing a position.
It is the same. See post #218, try to prove it wrong.
  • #224
  • Oct 27, 2009 9:22am Oct 27, 2009 9:22am
Quoting aquaart
Yes your algebraic logic is correct if you miss a position in MT5.
Which position did i miss? please reference the exact parts of my posting and show me the error! And using variables with names instead of meaningless numbers that don't tell you where they come from is far easier to understand.
  • #225
  • Edited 9:37am Oct 27, 2009 9:34am | Edited 9:37am
Quoting 7bit
Which position did i miss? please reference the exact parts of my posting and show me the error! And using variables with names instead of meaningless numbers that don't tell you where they come from is far easier to understand.
What your nice looking algebra addresses, in case one is the cost of opening and closing one position of equal volume.

Because that is the easiest to look at will assume that all positions requre this.

In MT5 you are required to close a buy position (first position) in order to take a sell positon (second position). Then to re-enter the long term buy position you again would be required to close the sell position to take the buy position (3rd position).
Cost = 6as (in total using your equation).

In MT4 you are NOT required to close the buy position (first position) to open your sell position (second position). Hence there is NO NEED to re-enter the long term buy position (the non-existent 3rd position for MT4 users).
Cost = 4as (in total using your equation).

Same but more complex logic would apply to your a>b and b>a scenarios.

Simple answer, look at the brown lines on diagrams.
Attached Image(s) (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: MT5 Requirements.jpg Size: 114 KB
Click to Enlarge Name: MT4 Requirements.jpg Size: 94 KB
  • #226
  • Edited 9:50am Oct 27, 2009 9:38am | Edited 9:50am
Quoting aquaart
Look at the above pictures and you'll see what I mean.
The pictures show 2 different scenarios. in the mt5 example you completely reverse the trade (close and open opposite), in the mt4 example you only compensate the buy with a same size sell which results in a net position of zero during the counter trend trade.

To correctly translate scenario in the MT5 picture (long-short-long) into MT4 you would have to open 2 lots counter trend, the first lot compensating the buy, the second one representing the sell, thus 3 lots total in MT4, just like in MT5.

To correctly translate the MT4 scenario (long-hedged-long) which is equal to (long-flat-long) into MT5 you would in MT5 simply close the 1 lot buy, then wait while being flat and then reopen it again, so you have 2 * 1 lot in MT5, just like in the MT4 picture.

q.e.d.
  • #227
  • Oct 27, 2009 9:44am Oct 27, 2009 9:44am
Quoting aquaart
What your nice looking algebra addresses, in case one is the cost of opening and closing one position of equal volume.
My "nice algebra" addresses all 3 possible cases, equal size (long - flat - long), smaller counter trade (long - smaller_long - long) and bigger counter trade (long - short - long)

i have pointed out the error in your two pictures, they are not the same scenario. see my posting above. Proof in #218 still standing!

You only need algebra. Clearly defined conditions and then some algebra to describe what this means. No need for error prone pictures and long essays.
  • #228
  • Oct 27, 2009 10:45am Oct 27, 2009 10:45am
Quoting 7bit
The pictures show 2 different scenarios. in the mt5 example you completely reverse the trade (close and open opposite), in the mt4 example you only compensate the buy with a same size sell which results in a net position of zero during the counter trend trade.

To correctly translate scenario in the MT5 picture (long-short-long) into MT4 you would have to open 2 lots counter trend, the first lot compensating the buy, the second one representing the sell, thus 3 lots total in MT4, just like in MT5.

To correctly translate the MT4 scenario...
You are the first person in 16 pages of responses that has been able to identify why these trading scenarios are wrong. Although many tried.

This correction would also address the losing scenario that I was pointing out to everyone (and so many people agreed to).

An appropriate Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Quoting 7bit
My "nice algebra" addresses all 3 possible cases, equal size (long - flat - long), smaller counter trade (long - smaller_long - long) and bigger counter trade (long - short - long)

i have pointed out the error in your two pictures, they are not the same scenario. see my posting above. Proof in #218 still standing!

You only need algebra. Clearly defined conditions and then some algebra to describe what this means. No need for error prone pictures and long essays.
I agreed with the Maths but assumed that you had messed up the scenarios. Instead it was the equivalence of the scenarios that I had messed up and had wrong all along.

Many thanks for sticking it out.

I'll have to start thinking of my counter trend neutral trades in a trend trading manner.

I'll also have to re-think my trade entry strategy when I receive 2 opposing signals.

And the only thing that sucks for me now, MQL4 to MQL5 incompatability due to this one position system.
  • #229
  • Oct 27, 2009 10:57am Oct 27, 2009 10:57am
Quoting jagui
You can try this:

http://trade-commander.com/mtibbridge/mtibbridge.htm
---------------------------

good one
iam looking for it !mt2ib
Have a good day!
  • #230
  • Oct 27, 2009 11:06am Oct 27, 2009 11:06am
Quoting aquaart
An appropriate Quod Erat Demonstrandum.


Many thanks for sticking it out.
Since you finally showed appreciation i have edited #218 and removed most of the subliminal sarcasm.
  • #231
  • Oct 27, 2009 12:10pm Oct 27, 2009 12:10pm
I have very little experience with these retail platforms - willing to test out a few to see how they tick. Any ideas? As an aside, I worked for a US bank on their trading floor - so I'm not super duper familiar with retail trading platforms. I worked with one, spread based - simple to use, not great charting - not horrible either. Want to move to ECN and figure out the fuss over MT4. Thanking you in advance for your input.
Alex
  • #232
  • Oct 27, 2009 12:38pm Oct 27, 2009 12:38pm
Quoting Alex-the-Gr8
I have very little experience with these retail platforms - willing to test out a few to see how they tick. Any ideas? As an aside, I worked for a US bank on their trading floor - so I'm not super duper familiar with retail trading platforms. I worked with one, spread based - simple to use, not great charting - not horrible either. Want to move to ECN and figure out the fuss over MT4. Thanking you in advance for your input.
Alex
Here is an MT4 Brokers List free of any MT5 brokers. MBTrading, Nordmarkets and the The Collective FX are supposably ECN.

There are others but never checked them out. AxisODL claimed to have an ECN feed available upon request.

Also NDD brokers can be very effective as well. FXCM, gomarkets are NDD.
  • #233
  • Oct 27, 2009 3:18pm Oct 27, 2009 3:18pm
I don't quite understand why do you keep calling it a SELL limit trade. I don't think it's relevant to the discussion but anyway... The SELL order just closes our LONG position. That's completely the same (except for swaps) as opening a SHORT position, while keeping the LONG open (MT4 case). I don't know why you can't understand it. We don't miss the counter-trend opportunity, we still earn profit from the counter-trend movement of the market (by not being in the LONG position during that movement). In fact the total profit for the example trades is equal in MT4 and MT5. The same is shown in post 218 by 7bit.

After all it's hard for me to understand why do you keep arguing about this case when it's so easy to check on practice by performing these trades in both MT4 and MT5.

Quoting aquaart
You seem to be assuming that closing a Buy trade with a SELL Limit trade is the same as taking a counter trend trade which really to play the semantics with words a "position". (This is an understandable mistake in terminology, as each opening trade in MT4 was also opening a separate position.) Hence the semantics with words on trade and position in the last few posts.

But taking the counter trend positon (formally an opening trade in MT4)and closing a Buy trade with a sell limit are not the same thing which is what your previous posts assume....
  • #234
  • Edited 8:30pm Oct 27, 2009 7:19pm | Edited 8:30pm
Quoting enivid
I don't quite understand why do you keep calling it a SELL limit trade. I don't think it's relevant to the discussion but anyway... The SELL order just closes our LONG position. That's completely the same (except for swaps) as opening a SHORT position, while keeping the LONG open (MT4 case). I don't know why you can't understand it. We don't miss the counter-trend opportunity, we still earn profit from the counter-trend movement of the market (by not being in the LONG position during that movement). In fact the total profit for the [url="http://www.forexfactory.com/showpost.php?p=3175417&postcount=208"]example...
What I was doing wrong, was that becasue MT4 have an identifiable sell position on the counter trend trade opening, then that that was the same as MT5 having a position... even though I could tell the positions were unequal.

I would then go on to highlight the inequality in the losing MT5 position, but take the number of sell positions in the profitable scenario (even though I could see that sell was just neutralising the buy position in MT4). As a result MT4 had the appearance of a position (making it appear better), and MT5 had the appearance of a greater loss. It took 7bit to actually correct the scenarios on a trade to trade basis for me to realise the inequivalent scenario stupidity.


7bit's post in 226 was what showed me what was wrong, and not one person before him accurately pointed out what was wrong with the 2 trade scenarios I had been constantly posting and using. They always referred to the overall position (which I agreed with and was the basis of the ineqivalence) rather than individual positons (MT4 thinker) that I was using.

Anyways you were right and I was wrong and MT5 still stuffs up EAs.


Normally a single net order can replicate all other orders exactly, but NOT always: Any scenario at any given point is ultimately nothing more than a net position, and can be replicated by a single order. However one exception is in a market can be moving so fast that it can hit both your buy and sell orders and you can tp on the server for both before you have a chance to put in another order.

I personally have a system that gives a trend entry, but occasionally gives a counter trend entry (a temporary ranged entry) 2 bars later on the 5 minute timeframe. However, both trades do continually go to profit, but not necessarily in a specific order. Consequently I will need to exit the trend entry or range entry and wait for the high or low to be made and trade in that direction. This will give me the same profit but require patience.
  • #235
  • Oct 27, 2009 7:57pm Oct 27, 2009 7:57pm
Quoting aquaart
7bit's post in 226 was what showed me what was wrong, and not one person before him accurately pointed out what was wrong with the 2 trade scenarios I had been constantly posting. They always referred to the overall position rather than individual positons (MT4 thinker) that I was using.
The fact that you finally admitted being (little) wrong tells me that you're an honest and intelligent person.

I was hoping this thread didn't end in an endless flame, so I resisted the urge to clarify what it seemed self-evident to me, avoiding to add fuel to the fire... so to speak.
  • #236
  • Oct 27, 2009 8:22pm Oct 27, 2009 8:22pm
Quoting jagui
The fact that you finally admitted being (little) wrong tells me that you're an honest and intelligent person.

I was hoping this thread didn't end in an endless flame, so I resisted the urge to clarify what it seemed self-evident to me, avoiding to add fuel to the fire... so to speak.
Yes the fact that I was wrong, was all based on the idea that the two scenarios were equivalent and a position was a position. Even though I was pointing out the inequivalence and strongly highlighting the losing position in my losing MT5 scenario.




Seems stupid.... ....because it is.
  • #237
  • Oct 27, 2009 9:14pm Oct 27, 2009 9:14pm
Quoting aquaart
Consequently I will need to exit the trend entry or range entry and wait for the high or low to be made and trade in that direction. This will give me the same profit but require patience.
Theoretically you should be able to do the following:

if you have a longterm buy of 2 lots currently open and you want to make a comletely independent quick short scalp with 3 lots you can *ignore* the currently open buy trade and just do a market sell of 3 lots and at the same time place buy limit and buy stop orders of 3 lots where you normally would have placed takeprofit and stoploss.

The market sell of 3 lots will automatically be added to the net position and in this case change it from 2 long to 1 short: (+2) + (-3) = -1

The pending buy orders of 3 lots would simulate your stoploss and takeprofit. When one of them is triggered it will restore your net position to the state it was before: (-1) + (+3) = +2

You just have to make sure that the other order is immediately canceled when one of them gets filled. Maybe MT5 can handle OCO (I havent tested it yet), this would help in this case, otherwise you will have to cancel it manually or write a small script for managing such counter trend trades and their stops and limits.
  • #238
  • Oct 28, 2009 6:10am Oct 28, 2009 6:10am
>>Originally Posted by aquaart
>>Counter trend trading is NOT the same as closing a position.

Quoting 7bit
It is the same. See post #218, try to prove it wrong.
It's only the same if your countertrade is in the same timeframe, which typically is NOT the case. Especially on EURUSD, which IMHO seems to change ideal timeframes in a New York minute.
  • #239
  • Oct 28, 2009 7:25am Oct 28, 2009 7:25am
Quoting rossiya
It's only the same if your countertrade is in the same timeframe, which typically is NOT the case. Especially on EURUSD, which IMHO seems to change ideal timeframes in a New York minute.
Are you a troll or something?
  • #240
  • Oct 28, 2009 9:59am Oct 28, 2009 9:59am
  •  onu
  • | Joined Feb 2006 | Status: superior senior member | 746 Posts
Quoting 7bit
Are you a troll or something?
Do trolls trade EUR/USD @ a NY minute????

sounds like Homer Simpson is his trading mentor
0 traders viewing now