No SL No Leverage Strategy - working so far

are you implementing or evaluating the lock-unlock method in some ways? maybe the method will work for profits too. and maybe better then with SL.

I do not agree with you. You can trade profitably without the stop-loss. If the right to develop a strategy using martingale, we can make a profit without risk of losing all the money. My expert works without stop for over a year, and my account for the year increased by more than 30 times...

30X?

show the statements, plz, if u so confident...... hoho

hide the info u'd like to hide.

Hi Nacho
I have been using a strategy with a live account now since Jan 2012. I have never used a stop loss. I started with 1,000. I use only 0.01 micro lots. I learnt a lot using this method. I planned this strategy, but not good enough. The things I learnt from this starategy is to use the pairs that have positive swap rates. Look at the big picture first (the forest) before entering a position, evaluate the price and ask yourself the question is it good value. Look at the week, day, 4h. timeframe. Then you know if things go against you have opened a position with good value and your getting interest every day. And on wednesday the interest is triple. Today i closed EURTRY 0.01. Open position -5.63 and interest +8.04 = +2.47. Iam still learning with this strategy and i have made some mistakes. Thats why i have a balance as of today of Eur 3,500 and Equity Eur 1,663. You learn from your mistakes but at leat i havent lost any money so far. I just have a large open position which I know in time will sort it self out. I also use the correlation tables to balance things out. Stop loss is not a must but in my opinion i would use high leverage if yoiur planning to use more pairs. High leverage for me is my insurance and open positions are my working capital. Plan everything correctly and think of all the pitfulls and you will be a winner at the end of the year.

I cant hedge so I can only theorize. They say if you hedge you are doing nothing but that isnt true. That is only true if you close both positions at the same time. If they are closed at different times then they are two separate trades with different results. If you close one at +100 and the other at -50 then your net is +50. That is not a nothing trade. I see no problem in hedging to ride out a bad situation and coming back to when the markets are more to your liking. The concept is fairly easy to understand. You may have a winning position but dont want to lose your profit in an upcoming news story so you hedge it to take yourself out of that news story. After the market has resettled you can then bank the saved profit or you can continue the winning profit if you so see fit. But of course we know there are people who cant comprehend more than one thing happening at a time.

A method without a stop loss that increased your account 30x in one year is hard to believe. Forgive me for not believing you at your word. In order to survive deep drawdowns your position sizes must be very small (relative to your account size). How did you increase your balance by 30x in one year with such small position sizes? Was it cause you were very aggressive in averaging down/martingaling? If so, then you are bringing stop loss into the equation (margin call) and contradicting everything you said. I'm willing to bet that IF you did achieve this, then you started with money you never cared to lose. That's the only way you would have been so aggressive and taken such a serious risk of large loss. Otherwise it's irresponsible to trade that way long term.

I would never trust an investor with my money if they said they could increase my account by 30x a year. In fact, I would run away from that person as fast as I could.

You can find a lot of systems on myfxbook (and the like) that use martingale type risk management without stops (just keeps adding or holding) and show "realized profits" of many multiples of their initial deposit. HOWEVER, their account equity is often right around their initial deposit since they are floating huge losses on open positions. It's just an accounting shift. Realized profit, R multiples, many hundreds of trades for adequate sample size, and a flat account is what you should measure by when comparing systems.


I often say there's no "wrong" way to trade so long as it's profitable... but martingale and holding losers are the two main things I'll speak out against since there's so much proven statical evidence that shows such things fail in the long run.

I think that's where alot of people decieve themselves. They only look at realized figures and completely ignore the floating loss. Of course all that really matters is your equity. Well said Jack.

I see hedging/nedging and trading two different setups on different timeframes as separate things - so long as either of the stop losses or take profits of both trades are not at the same price. But hedging for the sake of reducing exposure to one direction or "freeze time" is just plain dumb and noob-like. It is costlier to be hedged than to be completely out of the market because difference in swap is always to brokers favor. That is a fact. Furthermore, there is no hedged outcome that couldn't be replicated by straightforward (one directional) trade(s).

[quote=Pipsgeek;5531099]Stoploss is normally preferred over take profit. Stoploss prevents blowing your account, take profit prevents profiting 100 pips instead of 30.

It's going to succeed until it doesn't and then you will lose all your profits and even more because of spread. If you wait and wait and wait you will not make any profit during that time because if you expose more capital you run the risk of busting your account despite not using leverage.

It depends on the amount of TP he can pull below the big looser...it´s all math...
How many TP of 30 pips in a 1000, 2000,3000 pip move?
How many are hanging there with a big unrealized loss?
Well calculated it should make money...BUT it needs to be very very well calculated...
What are the chances of EURUSD going to 0, soon???
A stock could though...that´s similar to commodities...how can sugar be worth 0?
Big questions...Best is to lock some profit, and more profit , and more profit to digest the black holes...
Talk about gambling...
If you succeed, your broker will hate you...wish you the best...

It is obvious that we have some broker moles in the forum.
They work hard to fight against no stoploss strategies because
such strategies ( if traded reasonably ) will make the trader win
always and hurt the criminal broker.

Look here how brokers manipulate prices:

Yep

That vid has been around a while, the old mt4 plugin, it was posted on several 'impartial' forums and ended up being removed rather quickly...

I wonder how long it will remain on here....

M.


No S/L here.

You notice how self-proclaimed Pro traders rag hedging, call it nedging. Nedging doesnt exist but hedging does. India has position on hedging for its banks and large corp. customers, Hedge and protect your assets. I guess these unprofessional newbies traders in India should read BlueSteele famous book on using a SL that he was going to publish a month ago. LOL never see the light of day.

MUMBAI -- India's central bank Monday urged companies to hedge a larger portion of their currency exposures, saying that any foreign-exchange losses incurred by the firms could hurt their creditor banks.
"Corporates take a view on the exchange rate... and then decide whether to hedge or not to hedge... If we are looking for a safer system, then we will have to gear up on our hedging in a better way," Reserve Bank of India Deputy Governor Anand Sinha said in a speech to an industry lobby.
"We are not saying that 100% hedging should be there, but unhedged positions should be limited," he said.
The risk due to the Indian rupee's volatility has increased as the fast-growing emerging market is deepening its linkages with the global economy. The RBI's call to ramp up hedging comes as the rupee has lost about 3% against the U.S. dollar due to a sharp drop in capital inflows amid concerns over proposed changes to India's tax laws. The dollar was last trading at 52.56 rupees.
A number of software exporters such as Infosys Ltd. are opting to go light on hedges as they expect the rupee to remain weak against the dollar.
A weak rupee benefits exporters when they convert overseas revenue into the local currency. But, they forfeit that gain if they had locked into forward contracts to sell dollars at a lower exchange rate.
In February, the RBI released guidelines asking banks to evaluate the risks from unhedged foreign currency exposure of their clients and price credit accordingly. Banks were also asked to have their boards come out with a policy stipulating limits to the currency exposure that their clients can leave unhedged.
The RBI had imposed limits on currency positions that banks themselves can leave unhedged overnight after the rupee fell to a record low of 54.2925 to the dollar on Dec. 15.
It subsequently eased those limits on a case-by-case basis.

Bob... I don't understand why you want to turn this into an English language fight.

You can be right that in the book, the term hedgding means going long and short in the same pair (for forex).

But when it comes to making money, it does not help one bit.

As a retail speculator, hedging is bad for you because you are paying money for no reason.

The situation is different as a bank, you can hedge and still be paid premiums. They have other sources of incomes that benefit from the said "hedge". In fact, they might not even get charged for hedging because they are the ones providing liquidity in the first place. They are "the" forex market. So to them, the only drawback of hedging is that they will make less profits. They can hedge till the end of time and come out positive.

I have explained before that if you hedge with different instruments, such as futures and options, backed by a kind of asset (such as real physical commodity or stocks) you can also be paid premiums for your hedge. You can essentially hold your position until the end of time and still come out with a profit.

If you hedge in forex (buy and sell in the same pair), you will pay premiums. If you hold it till the end of time, you will lose money. Which is why we say it is a bad idea.

Actually I did a sorta hedge trade Friday. Both trades were winners. First price went down on the eur/cad, had a sell just below its previous low and made a profit and a buy above its previous high and it went for a profit. The key to hedge trades is not what they are doing when you enter but when you exit. They both can go for a profit. I could have done the same thing with a hedge trade. My mind is not as closed or limited in what you can do with it than yours is. You can enter both at the same time but you dont have to exit at the same time. But I am not going to beat this dead horse anymore. I just want to point out that there are uses for it whether you like it or not or see any purpose in it or not. People successfully use hedges to decrease their risk in Forex or temporarily get out of a market move they dont like. To protect your assets is not a meaningless trade.

I reply to this at the risk of being accused as a broker mole by you again. Although maybe not this time since I will be agreeing with some of what you said.

I don't think you will find many people on here that will argue with you whether brokers have reasons to cheat or not. Just think of it... they spend alot of money on servers, telecommunications equipment, software development and integration, marketing (ads), staff, training staff, physical location, etc. Do you think they just want to provide you with a service that could cost them even more money when you profit? NO. They are in business to profit and spend alot of money in order to profit. Some, like FXCM and Gain Capital (aka Forex.com), even have an "obligation" to their shareholders to profit - although that doesn't really mean crap.

My MetaTrader experience (early days of trading for me):

When I was very new to forex I thought MetaTrader (MT4) was great, but not too long after did I start to really dislike it, and worse, distrust it. As a noob I remember thinking how great it was that I could be away from home working or doing whatever and a "robot" (EA) could be used to trade on the platform. After testing many EA's I found a couple that I felt should work with some tweaking. The tweaking involved some very conservative money management in the form of lot sizing and the strategies were sound on paper and verified through backtesting as well as forward testing. Up to this point I had learned enough to know that you have to position yourself small and build from there otherwise you will be overleveraged and death (figuratively speaking) comes shortly after. Well at first these few selected EA's did work until one day they suddenly didn't. And I don't mean that the strategy didn't work. I mean the actual EA's stopped working. Trades stopped opening when they should have. Trades closed when they shouldn't have. Sometimes trades didn't close. That wasn't the worst of it. Sometimes I'd come home to find that metatrader was somehow shut down or that the EA was inactive as if somebody clicked on the button that makes the smiley face turn into a frowny face. Irony? When I tweaked the parameters to intentionally lose by either oversizing or other means, the same EA never had problems. So the EA works flawlessly when you lose but doesn't when you profit. What a coincidence! And yes I did intentionally throw some money "out the window" just to test that theory out. I'm convinced to this day (without really having smoking gun evidence) that my platform was remotely manipulted. I also thought if they could do that then they could surely affect the execution and slippage as well. Since around that time I never trusted MT4 for anything except for charting on larger time frames. I made the decision in my mind that I would never execute another trade on MT4 again. Never ever. This was before the existence of the Virtual Dealer Plugin was widely known. And even though I was discouraged by this, I knew that it was still profitable to make money in forex trading. But the answer is not in removing stop loss altogether. If anything, this helps the broker by giving them a free run at your whole account. Allow me to explain...

I've said it many times here (some choose to disregard it) that realized and unrealized are the same. If you open a long at 1.3000 and an hour later price is at 1.2950, you've lost 50 pips whether the trade is open or not. The concept that by setting a stop means your broker is going to "hunt" your stop is not exactly true (*more on what I mean by not exactly true later). If that was the case then why not have another account with a different broker and play one broker versus the other by setting a stop on a smaller sized trade in opposite direction? Then as price moves towards the stop close both trades for an overall profit. Or pull the stop and add size to the negative trade, then set a smaller sized trade with stop loss in opposite direction on other broker. If they are hunting stops then you can play them back and forth like a yoyo, right? I've tried this. It doesn't give you an edge trust me. At least not with the brokers I've used and I've tried many. And even though the prices might be slightly off between two brokers, there can't be a big discrepancy. If there is because one broker is playing 'dirty games', then they risk losing more then there is to gain. Unless you trade with an unregulated broker on some castaway island, then you deserve to lose your money.

*By 'not exactly true' I mean the broker could shade the price against you to trigger your stop at a worse price than it should have been if it were going to hit your stop anyway. This could also benefit the broker by triggering your stop when it might not have hit the stop because then price could move in your favor afterward. In other words the broker is shifting odds in their favor, but he cannot control the market ultimately. The broker cannot control price on a macro level but they can shift things on a micro level to their advantage.

What I am trying to say to those of you that are cynical about setting stops is not that you are completely wrong. There is good reason to be cynical - remember they spend lots of money to be in business for profit and not lose to you. Go ahead and be cynical if your stop is a few pips away. Just don't be paranoid about a broker moving price 300 pips to go after you. If price is manipulated hundreds of pips to take out stops by whatever powers there might be, then you were on the wrong side of market efficiency anyway. Who's to say that "they" are not going to keep moving it hundreds of pips past where your stop would have been to go after others? Do you really think they will reverse it once they just get you? What sense does it make to hold something going hundreds of pips negative? Now I'm not saying there is a big bad wolf out there looking to get everyone, but if there is what difference does it make at the macro level? Ride with the wolf then (if there is one). But again it doesn't matter whether there is or isn't because patterns, supports, resistances and trends provide edges whether they are created by manipulation or not.

A large bank can't afford to take hits by shifts in the world market. They have exposures that are much different than little retail traders bob. Duh. Therefore they hedge. The hedging they do is not the kind of hedging you or I do. I also believe that the only time bluesteele got on your case about hedging is when you said you are hedging the same exact instrument. That I can tell you is just plain dumb. I've explained why here.

Lastly, I don't think it's cool that you trash someone like you did here with bluesteele after you had him banned by your buddy. You make a statement about someone after they been taken away the opportunity to respond. Not cool. If you want people to treat you like the man you say you are, then you don't do things like that.

i'm with you on NO SL trading is dumb and dangerous.

but in fact, i guess that maybe we neglect one important factor in trading.

although NO SL results in less profit than SL in mathematical sense, but in "timing" sense, NO SL might be better than SL. but how?

i guess it is the second chance???

say i have a 70% correct system, if the 1st entry is wrong, I hedged it with 2nd opposite position. using same 70% system, find another spot where one position is in profit, and the timing is good to entry. at that time, exit the profitable position and continue trading.

or say, one trader can delay his loss by "fully hedge", or wait for a better opportunity/timing point to avoid the loss. am i wrong?

this is the timing factor that hanover's explanation doesn't mention, if i remember. have you covered this in your posts? i didn't find similar discussion too.

The way I am trading actually requires lots of patience. But Im still successful and my equity curve keeps going north. I have hedged some positions with success. I see hedging as a pretty sure way to increase/build my equity while holding on a losing position. If the 2nd trade i open in the opposite direction is not closing with tp, at least my 1st opened trade will not increase its loss. Eventually the 2nd trade will close with tp...and the 1st one as well (just a matter of patience and time).