DislikedI love these type of threads.
Why do you think banks and other financial institutions employ traders rather than spending millions on developing fully automated systems.
The reason is that it cannot currently be done to any significant percentage.
They do however have semi-automated systems which after millions of calculations will give BUY, SELL or CLOSE signals but the decision is left to the human trader to accept or ignore the advice being given.
A purely technical driven EA or system alone cannot be profitable long term without taking into...Ignored
- #21
- Jun 26, 2010 8:09am Jun 26, 2010 8:09am
- Joined Jun 2007 | Status: Teach men to fish | 7,384 Posts
I disagree. I think a profitable automated system can be developed, that is purely technical in nature. What I am certain of, is that it would have to be a hell of a lot more complex and comprehensive than anything you will find on a public forum.
I am doing it. Recently I had a sound system base on logic & mathematical calculation and seems complex at the beginning. But recently after reviewing the code, it is quite simple actually.
I had bad experienced sharing .ex4 file in forum which people decompile my code. That's make me kept it until I had good idea how to protect my EA.
I use to join EA tournament but not for this one EA.
I named my code as ChampionEA2010
running 24/5base on USD100 and starting lot 0.01,
monthly tested results so far modelling 90%:
Jan 2010 account gain +74%, affiliate +54%
Feb2010 account gain +54%, affiliate +18%
Mac 2010 account gain +27%, affiliate +18%
April 2010 account gain +60%, affiliate +22%
- #23
- Jun 26, 2010 10:30am Jun 26, 2010 10:30am
- Joined Jul 2007 | Status: 33 y/o Investor/Trader/Programmer | 5,016 Posts
- #25
- Jun 26, 2010 12:06pm Jun 26, 2010 12:06pm
- Joined Jul 2007 | Status: 33 y/o Investor/Trader/Programmer | 5,016 Posts
- #30
- Jun 26, 2010 7:36pm Jun 26, 2010 7:36pm
- Joined Jun 2007 | Status: Teach men to fish | 7,384 Posts
- #31
- Jun 26, 2010 8:35pm Jun 26, 2010 8:35pm
- Joined Nov 2006 | Status: Trader | 4,417 Posts
to trade and code, keep both simple... no call to impress....h
- #32
- Jun 26, 2010 8:53pm Jun 26, 2010 8:53pm
- Joined Nov 2008 | Status: living deliberately | 11,122 Posts
- #36
- Jun 27, 2010 10:20am Jun 27, 2010 10:20am
- Joined Jul 2007 | Status: 33 y/o Investor/Trader/Programmer | 5,016 Posts
- #39
- Jun 27, 2010 9:37pm Jun 27, 2010 9:37pm
- Joined Jun 2007 | Status: Teach men to fish | 7,384 Posts
That's a very limited view. An EA can use time, open of sessions, breakouts, key levels which are not at all indicators.
Time, so let me ask you, you enter at 300 every day? Time may determine when you want your EA to turn on or off but it does not determine how you enter a trade. If you say I do a buy every day at 300 on the EUR/USD no one would take your method seriously. It is not an indicator used to determine your entrance or exit. Same with open sessions, what do you have an EA that says do a sell every day on the GBP USD at the beginning of the USA session?? No one would take that seriously either Again it does not determine entrances or exits only when you want the EA to come on or off. It is an irrelevant to the debate.
Breakouts would be based on previous highs and lows based on some indicator. If the present high is greater then the previous candle high (attach any time frame I dont care) could be written in the code as this: if Bid is greater than the 1 Moving Average High of the previous candle then enter a buy. That is one way an EA is coded to do that trade. If your criteria is different than that, it still takes some form of MA indicator to enter the trade. So you didnt understand how you would even code the EA to do that entrance.
Key levels are all determined by where groups of candles meet. I already told you how Pivots, Fibs are coded. Obviously you dont understand how those lines are determined in a programming code. When a programmer codes an EA, indicator, etc. there are determining factors which you have to write to make the event happen. Those factors are determined by MA averages and/or math formulas of those MA. That is how an EA is written. Those lines, bars, candles, etc. you see on the screen that move with time like MA, STO, MACD, etc. use MA in the code to determine their lines, bars, candles, etc. OR they fix those lines in time like Pivots, Fibs, etc. and they are set on the screen for a time period until enough new info comes in to change them. With FIbs its a newer high or low, with pivots its a new time period. That is how they are coded in an EA. You may not understand the guts of how an EA works but that is how a programmer has to look at it. What causes an EA to enter or exit a trade, some kind of math formula based on some kind of input of averages. That is how they work. Once you fix those in a code then the weaknesses of that coding procedure or formula will then pop up over time. So all EAs will have a weakness and can be beaten under certain market conditions. Some things just can not be coded.
So do I use EAs, yes, am I successful with them, yes, but I only use them under certain market conditions and turn them off when those conditions are not met. There are some things that just cannot be coded into a formula. That is the weakness of any and all EA systems. The key to successfully using EAs is to know their weaknesses and then deal with them and let the successful part just run. However, if you dont want to understand or acknowledge their weaknesses you will never be successful with them. That is my point.
Another fallacy. The lagging indicators are derivatives of price. There are leading indicators, like fibs or S/R, which have nothing to do with averages.
You need to read a good article on how FIBS are designed. They are a math formula of a previous high and low on a high TF, that is a fact. The Math formula is an average of the points in between and then fixed in time. That is what a MA is. A math formula of previous information. A 5 MA is a math formula of the last 5 bars. A 10MA is math formula of the last 10 bars. A Fib is a math formula of the previous high compared to the previous low over a certain time period. That high and low is then entered into a math formula and the average is plotted on the screen as a line. The 23.6 line is a 23.6 % average of the high and low. The 50 line is a 50% average and so on. Those lines will change depending on the TF you use. I am not a fib guy once you understand what makes it work you realize it is nothing and has nothing to do with price or the future.
S/R are based on several different types of indicators. Some take the previous highs and lows that gather in a certain area and average them out to form a Support or Resistance line. (did you see the word average again). Others can be based on an indicator (which is designed on some math formula based on averages) and then draws a line. (Fractal S/R) Fractals are based on a math formula and draws a nice little dot or arrow on your screen when that math formula is met. When you are a programmer to make things work you have to come up with Math formulas and averages to do them. That is why my statement stands as stated. To write an EA you have to use indicators that are based on MA averages to make them work. Nothing you have said changes that statement.
Actually you said nothing new, please read my previous explanations.
See above for better understanding. I do not withdraw anything I have said.
We all know this and we try to beat the price movement more often that she beats us.
I agree.
Time, so let me ask you, you enter at 300 every day? Time may determine when you want your EA to turn on or off but it does not determine how you enter a trade. If you say I do a buy every day at 300 on the EUR/USD no one would take your method seriously. It is not an indicator used to determine your entrance or exit. Same with open sessions, what do you have an EA that says do a sell every day on the GBP USD at the beginning of the USA session?? No one would take that seriously either Again it does not determine entrances or exits only when you want the EA to come on or off. It is an irrelevant to the debate.
Breakouts would be based on previous highs and lows based on some indicator. If the present high is greater then the previous candle high (attach any time frame I dont care) could be written in the code as this: if Bid is greater than the 1 Moving Average High of the previous candle then enter a buy. That is one way an EA is coded to do that trade. If your criteria is different than that, it still takes some form of MA indicator to enter the trade. So you didnt understand how you would even code the EA to do that entrance.
Key levels are all determined by where groups of candles meet. I already told you how Pivots, Fibs are coded. Obviously you dont understand how those lines are determined in a programming code. When a programmer codes an EA, indicator, etc. there are determining factors which you have to write to make the event happen. Those factors are determined by MA averages and/or math formulas of those MA. That is how an EA is written. Those lines, bars, candles, etc. you see on the screen that move with time like MA, STO, MACD, etc. use MA in the code to determine their lines, bars, candles, etc. OR they fix those lines in time like Pivots, Fibs, etc. and they are set on the screen for a time period until enough new info comes in to change them. With FIbs its a newer high or low, with pivots its a new time period. That is how they are coded in an EA. You may not understand the guts of how an EA works but that is how a programmer has to look at it. What causes an EA to enter or exit a trade, some kind of math formula based on some kind of input of averages. That is how they work. Once you fix those in a code then the weaknesses of that coding procedure or formula will then pop up over time. So all EAs will have a weakness and can be beaten under certain market conditions. Some things just can not be coded.
So do I use EAs, yes, am I successful with them, yes, but I only use them under certain market conditions and turn them off when those conditions are not met. There are some things that just cannot be coded into a formula. That is the weakness of any and all EA systems. The key to successfully using EAs is to know their weaknesses and then deal with them and let the successful part just run. However, if you dont want to understand or acknowledge their weaknesses you will never be successful with them. That is my point.
Another fallacy. The lagging indicators are derivatives of price. There are leading indicators, like fibs or S/R, which have nothing to do with averages.
You need to read a good article on how FIBS are designed. They are a math formula of a previous high and low on a high TF, that is a fact. The Math formula is an average of the points in between and then fixed in time. That is what a MA is. A math formula of previous information. A 5 MA is a math formula of the last 5 bars. A 10MA is math formula of the last 10 bars. A Fib is a math formula of the previous high compared to the previous low over a certain time period. That high and low is then entered into a math formula and the average is plotted on the screen as a line. The 23.6 line is a 23.6 % average of the high and low. The 50 line is a 50% average and so on. Those lines will change depending on the TF you use. I am not a fib guy once you understand what makes it work you realize it is nothing and has nothing to do with price or the future.
S/R are based on several different types of indicators. Some take the previous highs and lows that gather in a certain area and average them out to form a Support or Resistance line. (did you see the word average again). Others can be based on an indicator (which is designed on some math formula based on averages) and then draws a line. (Fractal S/R) Fractals are based on a math formula and draws a nice little dot or arrow on your screen when that math formula is met. When you are a programmer to make things work you have to come up with Math formulas and averages to do them. That is why my statement stands as stated. To write an EA you have to use indicators that are based on MA averages to make them work. Nothing you have said changes that statement.
Actually you said nothing new, please read my previous explanations.
See above for better understanding. I do not withdraw anything I have said.
We all know this and we try to beat the price movement more often that she beats us.
I agree.
- #40
- Jun 27, 2010 11:32pm Jun 27, 2010 11:32pm
- Joined Sep 2006 | Status: ... | 8,112 Posts
my opinion, it is better than martingale.
I hope that it proves profitable for you.