I liked the 2nd and 3rd trades. They did what they were designed to do- return profits if price started ranging. They seemed to work, for that purpose.
There was a Bat EA thread. There was an EA. I tried it on a demo platform. It didn't follow the rules. That thread and EA is around somewhere.
(You posted in that thread to advise people not to add filters too
) Hmmm,
I see, I actually just looked over a rangy period and it does have it's merits. Would you consider 3rd June - 2nd July on GBPJPY a rangey period for this system ? Or the last month on GBPUSD . . . Actually I'm going to test those tomorrow. I think you are correct bill. Also assuming that entries 2 and 3 are profitable in rangey markets there is no need for a filter.
If one is to enter on the 2 and 3, when is a loss taken ? At the swing which the trade is based off of or is 2 and 3 exited with the BAT ? I remember the TP was going to be at the initial BAT line.
More importantly what sort of MM were you employing ? I see Team Aphid didn't use %R.
I initially discarded it as in my mind there is no reason for the Fib's to actually work if you get me, as there's nobody basing a trading decision based on the retracement of a Fib which has a swing high/low which is not a real swing high/low . . . If you get me.
I assume Team Aphid looked at it the Fib's, and recorded the amount of times that such an outcome occured when the fib retracements were striked and it was profitable.
I think it's profitable just because of averaging down and it's easier to turn around and travel back to a price with relatively smaller orderflow between it than having to fight the orderflow to take out the swing.
It's not like the fib's have any magical powers of their own. Aside as a reason to average down.
I actually had another idea which would work in ranging enviornments, I will backtest both of them vs eachother tomorrow.
Really appreciate your input bill,
Jig
