First of all thank you for your EA v5. It is really good idea to have the indi in the chart while the ea manages trade accordingly to indis setup. THANK YOU!
In last 30 days I visual backtested GU, EU and ChfU with a lot of various settings from 01/2009 till the end of March to see how many martingale levels is needed to get a profit every day. To my surprise the open time is really not the main factor of profitabilty (with martingale). Ive found that what really matters is relationship between boxsize (SL in my case)) and TP (Entry point is a SL of opositte trade in my case - no buffer). I also have found that trading any breakout box without martingale sequnce (just one trade a day win or loss) has in long term very low gain or loss in more cases.
The problem is to find proper settings for each pair to get as low martingale levels as possilble. The best setting were the box 20 pips to 10 pips (+spread) TP. In this case the tp were hit most times by the first level (no matter if there were volatile or ranging day) and there were only 9 trades of 260 in a year 2009 which exceeded third level of martingale. The problem (for me) is that the martingale sequence has to be multiplied by 3 (due twice bigger SL than TP) which needs more funds to cover at least 8 levels. The balance in your account should be then at least ten times higher than potencial gain for a year from this system. My personal thought is that Im not willing to risk thousands of dollars for 260usd a year (counting IBFX 0.1 micro account).
Another and more reasonable option were the 10-12 incl spread fo EU and 20-24 incl. spread for GU. The problem with danger to hit more than 10 levels of martingale in a day still remains here. And even if previous years showed me there were only 5 or 6 levels with some settings, it is not sure it wont exceed sixth level later.
In fact a bad trade (9 and more levels) occurs once or two times a year which is almost same probabilty like to win BINGO. Which led my to another thought: Why not reverse the martingale to loose 20 cents every day and wait for a bad trade which gain my capital in a day. In fact Bad trade is hard to find. Even with "wrong settings" you do not see too much. And its absolutely unpredictible (at least for me..) Conclusion: Antimartingale is a non-sense..
All my tests brought me back to Mers idea. I think it is safer to use martingale sequence to multiply trade after loosing trade.
I havent see more than 8 losses in a row with proper settings..
But that does not mean I will stop looking for better settings to have martingale profitable intradaily.
So thats my two cents...
In last 30 days I visual backtested GU, EU and ChfU with a lot of various settings from 01/2009 till the end of March to see how many martingale levels is needed to get a profit every day. To my surprise the open time is really not the main factor of profitabilty (with martingale). Ive found that what really matters is relationship between boxsize (SL in my case)) and TP (Entry point is a SL of opositte trade in my case - no buffer). I also have found that trading any breakout box without martingale sequnce (just one trade a day win or loss) has in long term very low gain or loss in more cases.
The problem is to find proper settings for each pair to get as low martingale levels as possilble. The best setting were the box 20 pips to 10 pips (+spread) TP. In this case the tp were hit most times by the first level (no matter if there were volatile or ranging day) and there were only 9 trades of 260 in a year 2009 which exceeded third level of martingale. The problem (for me) is that the martingale sequence has to be multiplied by 3 (due twice bigger SL than TP) which needs more funds to cover at least 8 levels. The balance in your account should be then at least ten times higher than potencial gain for a year from this system. My personal thought is that Im not willing to risk thousands of dollars for 260usd a year (counting IBFX 0.1 micro account).
Another and more reasonable option were the 10-12 incl spread fo EU and 20-24 incl. spread for GU. The problem with danger to hit more than 10 levels of martingale in a day still remains here. And even if previous years showed me there were only 5 or 6 levels with some settings, it is not sure it wont exceed sixth level later.
In fact a bad trade (9 and more levels) occurs once or two times a year which is almost same probabilty like to win BINGO. Which led my to another thought: Why not reverse the martingale to loose 20 cents every day and wait for a bad trade which gain my capital in a day. In fact Bad trade is hard to find. Even with "wrong settings" you do not see too much. And its absolutely unpredictible (at least for me..) Conclusion: Antimartingale is a non-sense..
All my tests brought me back to Mers idea. I think it is safer to use martingale sequence to multiply trade after loosing trade.
I havent see more than 8 losses in a row with proper settings..
But that does not mean I will stop looking for better settings to have martingale profitable intradaily.
So thats my two cents...
)
haha