Disagree. There is no difference. Martingale merely redistributes wins and losses**. I would need to see a solid mathematical proof to convince me otherwise. If you can't use martingale to gain an advantage at the casino, why would it be any different with forex?
3)You can bank in profit very high percentage return >100% in quick period of time, basically before reach death trade...
Disagree on the grounds that you can't possibly know when the death trade is going to occur. And withdrawing money reduces your ability to survive future losses (i.e. the number of martingale levels your account can cope with). Also, martingale (as I understand it) doesn't increase % return; it is merely a way of recovering from a recent sequence of losses by way of a single trade.
compare it with fix lot. you will get up and down results, end of the same period, you may slightly increase/decrease your account or breakeven. Some will also meet margin call.
Yes but with small fixed lot (e.g. 1% risk per trade) you have time to shut down the EA and escape with your remaining capital. With martingale, one death trade creates a margin call instantly and unexpectedly.
[** the XLS attached to this post demonstrates how and why this is the case].
Yes, it doesn't provide an edge. But it makes the difference between getting 1% or getting 10% annually from your edge.
Disagree. You could simply trade larger fixed positions to achieve the same thing. Everything else being equal, variable sizing merely redistributes wins and losses**.
You make it sound like people should not worry about finding an optimum MM at all.
Optimum MM is a balance between maximizing return and minimizing risk of ruin, and can be achieved equally well by using fixed lot sizes.
A black swan will get you anyway, even with a very conservative MM. That's what Taleb argues.
Yes, but if you size at (for example) 1% then it will take a large number of losses to ruin you, and you have time to bale out, and escape with your remaining capital. With martingale, you can survive only a few losses because of the exponential sizing (1+2+4+8+16+.... etc), and if you're running an EA that trades intraday unattended, the death trade losing sequence can ruin you before you have a chance to react.
I could use a MM system where I would double down 2 or 3 times, but I would cut my loses there, at a maximum 10% account drawdown.
If you double down 3 times, then after 3 losses you've lost 1+2+4 = 7 units. Now, by returning to 1 unit sizing, you need 7 consecutive wins to compensate for the 3 losses. Needing a high ratio of wins makes your recovery system work unnecessarily hard, IMO.
[** the XLS attached to this post demonstrates how and why this is the case].
Anyway, I'm merely restating the same points, and reposting the same link, that I did earlier. If you good folk disagree, well that's fine, let's just leave it at that.
I wish you all the best with your trading.
1