Building an equity millipede | Page 338 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Thegman's Journal (Equity Millipede Concept) 102 replies

Trading an Equity Millipede 23 replies

Equity millipede & Flying Buddha trading journal 9 replies

Build an Equity Millipede with the filtered Flying Buddha 171 replies

Application Development - Journal of Building an equity millipede 14 replies

Attachments: Building an equity millipede
Exit Attachments

Building an equity millipede

  • #6,741
  • Oct 19, 2014 6:41pm Oct 19, 2014 6:41pm
Hi RT,

very nice charts and explanations you posted. So please don't stop I also noticed the behaviour of the pullbacks which you were referring to.
One question I still have concerning this chart:

http://www.forexfactory.com/attachme...3&d=1413720449

The green inside bar that is still in play here would have been broken to the upside by this little Doji bar. At least I would have taken a bullish bias since the trend is still up and would have seen this bearish moves that later continues to be bearish as correction. Did you have a reason why you "knew" that the 5 bearish bars with the green bullish IB were not a correction but the start of a move down?
  • #6,742
  • Oct 19, 2014 6:51pm Oct 19, 2014 6:51pm
Regarding the statement that is often said here that entrances are not important I would strongly disagree.
It is right that in a bullish trend that lasts maybe for years the exact entrance is not important but when you do enter the trade has to reach at least BE to be able to become a millipede. Only after then you can think about when to exit.
If it does not get to BE it does not help if after reaching your SL the market moves up for further 1000 pips. So entrance is still the most important crucial point in trading. Anything else (trailing, exit) just follows.
In the example above for example my entrance which would have been long had been stopped out for a loss. So I would't had the possibility to participate in the market and create a leg or even a normal trade with a fix TP. And finding where to enter is still the hardest thing besides all the emotianal obstacles.
  • #6,743
  • Oct 19, 2014 8:19pm Oct 19, 2014 8:19pm
Quoting Myrmica
Hi RT, very nice charts and explanations you posted. So please don't stop I also noticed the behaviour of the pullbacks which you were referring to. One question I still have concerning this chart: {image} The green inside bar that is still in play here would have been broken to the upside by this little Doji bar. At least I would have taken a bullish bias since the trend is still up and would have seen this bearish moves that later continues to be bearish as correction. Did you have a reason why you "knew" that the 5 bearish bars with the green...
I will try to elaborate more later but part of my approach is intraday trendline break and pullbacks. Also without going back to the chart i cannot be 100% sure, but i believe that trade was under the london open (trading in the direction of the day).

I will get on my PC and try to break it down further later in the day. Thanks for the feedback.
  • #6,744
  • Edited 10:29pm Oct 19, 2014 9:47pm | Edited 10:29pm
Quoting VEEFX
Just like TRD described hedge funds positioning long trades on AUDJPY.....down/up/down/up/down/up...600million worth of long positions deployed. Retail Traders got screwed...institutional traders took some profits from shorts and positioned themselves and their clients for long term swap generating legs. Weekly targets/bonus sccomplished. Time to enjoy the weekend. That is how smart money operates.....scaling in to build large positions as apparent from the COT report.we CAN operate our own institutional hedge fund with this hindsight and hard core...

Off she goes up after a weekend gap....just like I said last week

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8kb...p=docslist_api
Staying in my lane...
  • #6,745
  • Oct 20, 2014 2:05am Oct 20, 2014 2:05am
Quoting Razor_trader
{quote} I will try to elaborate more later but part of my approach is intraday trendline break and pullbacks. Also without going back to the chart i cannot be 100% sure, but i believe that trade was under the london open (trading in the direction of the day). I will get on my PC and try to break it down further later in the day. Thanks for the feedback.
Hi RT,

The charts you shared adds further proof why Calculus claimed in post:

http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...94#post7375694


that those who do not move their positions to BE will make more money in the long run. I used to wonder why Peter Crown's initially leaves the SL of the remaining 1/2 position at the other side of the insider bar instead of moving it to BE. Only when I started trading insidebars exclusively I realized that more often than not the price area of the breakout gets retested within a day or two. As seen on the pictures I have attached, even the chart examples that RT and TRD shows how price sometimes moves just optimally enough to take out the BE positions whether the timeframe is hourly or weekly.

One of my core entry methods share a very similar approach where I look bounces near the open price if the previous down candle for buys and the open price of the previous up candles for sells. The trade off is that I may miss a few more trades compared to a person trading looking for bounces off high/low but the probability is higher when it comes to potential survivability.

It's really a give and take. WHEN the person decides to move their position to BE will vary from trader to trader as well. Those who like to move their positions to BE much earlier will miss the opportunity to let their position ride to a much higher potential but will have smaller drawdowns. Those who move their SL to BE much later or don't move them at all will have more positions surviving but will have to take more hits and hence bigger drawdowns.
Attached Images
  • #6,746
  • Oct 20, 2014 3:06am Oct 20, 2014 3:06am
Quoting yonseo
{quote} Hi RT, The charts you shared adds further proof why Calculus claimed in post: http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...94#post7375694 that those who do not move their positions to BE will make more money in the long run. I used to wonder why Peter Crown's initially leaves the SL of the remaining 1/2 position at the other side of the insider bar instead of moving it to BE. Only when I started trading insidebars exclusively I realized that more often than not the price...
Its just uncanny how often it happens. It is similar with the SL at swing high/lows and seeing the number of times the market just breaks those levels and then runs the other way. I try not to stress to much over the entry but needless to say, when I get a solid trade executed on those principles the returns can be quite healthy, so much so that even with 1/2 off the position size can be fairly good.

Still learning to trust everything I do as I have this nasty habit of growing accounts nice and steadily and then just going into some reckless mode where I fall off the wagon. It is why I took a long hiatus and did some soul searching and am still working on my trading plan to list all the criteria for trading.

RT
  • #6,747
  • Oct 20, 2014 3:25am Oct 20, 2014 3:25am
I think this move-to-BE discussion is too much of a generalisation.
Type of entry is hugely important on BE decisions.
Inside bars are breakouts and carry a much higher risk of whipsaw/revisit of entry price, which is why Peter Crowns leaves the stop where it is.
FBs are exhaustion / rubber band / -call them what you will- and carry less risk of a revisit.
Fantastic high momentum moves will not be missed by the BE-moving-too-soon traders. But will be missed by retrace hunters.
PIPeasy used / (potentially uses) momentum and seems very relaxed moving to BE. He has lots of BEs. He doesn't miss moves that don't look back. He hunts momentum. A "just right" entry will be right before a big move.
PIPeasy taught some fantastic lessons, no need to distort his teachings.

Vee's prediction of "big boys" pushing AUDJPY up was right on my 1H FB short entry, now at BE. It will go up, it will go down. Half of the predictors are right half of the times and the other half are right the other times. I am guessing Graeme would be / is short from that FB as well.
  • #6,748
  • Oct 20, 2014 3:34am Oct 20, 2014 3:34am
Quoting yonseo
{quote} Hi RT, The charts you shared adds further proof why Calculus claimed in post: http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...94#post7375694 that those who do not move their positions to BE will make more money in the long run. I used to wonder why Peter Crown's initially leaves the SL of the remaining 1/2 position at the other side of the insider bar instead of moving it to BE. Only when I started trading insidebars exclusively I realized that more often than not the price...
Calculus also stated

Quote
Moving stops to breakeven is the easy thing to do which probably means overtime it's the wrong thing to do.

Not moving stops to breakeven, ie keeping the original stop which will result in a loss if executed, is the hard thing to do which means it's the right thing to do.

So very true. The number of times in my trading life that I have moved SL's to BE OR exited a trade early due to too much screen time skewing my original trading premise only to see the original trade work is more than I care to count.

I remember listening to webinar that involved a pretty successful prop trader who said that often it is the hardest choice, the one that goes against the grain that is the right one. If the choice is easy, it is likely to fail.

I think that is why so many people fail because no one likes to do things outside of the comfort zone. We see a pullback and we starting thinking we have to buy this dip because it is going to turn soon only to watch it go further, missing what appears afterwards to be some obvious signs to short it.
  • #6,749
  • Oct 20, 2014 3:36am Oct 20, 2014 3:36am
Quoting Razor_trader
{quote} Its just uncanny how often it happens. It is similar with the SL at swing high/lows and seeing the number of times the market just breaks those levels and then runs the other way. I try not to stress to much over the entry but needless to say, when I get a solid trade executed on those principles the returns can be quite healthy, so much so that even with 1/2 off the position size can be fairly good. Still learning to trust everything I do as I have this nasty habit of growing accounts nice and steadily and then just going into some reckless...
Indeed RT!

The biggest enemy in trading is ourselves and the only pressure on us is ourselves. You make a very important point about SL at swing high/lows and how price breaks those levels and then runs away. That information alone really tells us the psychological aspect of most traders. Majority of traders are HIGHLY UNLIKELY to re enter once their position gets taken out for a loss at those levels or even when their position at BE at taken out at other levels. Infact, the longer the duration of the holding period of such positions, the less likely we are to re enter at those price levels.

The ultimate reason behind this has to do with life in general:

"The greater the expectation, the greater the disappointment"

For example, the more trust we place towards someone, the more pain that person is capable of inflicting on us. The more happiness we find towards something we have, the more misery it brings once we lose that thing.

Same principle applies in trading. It's very easy for new traders to get emotionally attached to their position. Compare a position 20 pips in profits turning into BE or a loss compared to a position hundreds of pips in profits turning into BE or a loss. The latter is no doubt more painful.

This principle also explains why alot of new traders hop from system to system without being able to settle down for 1 system that is infact profitable over time. Many of the systems out there that tell people what they WANT TO HEAR sucessfully do this by cherry picking charts that worked very well according to their trading rules. Then when the excited new trader follows the rules and loses money, what does he do? The trader becomes angry and repeats the process of being scammed into a different system.
  • #6,750
  • Oct 20, 2014 4:21am Oct 20, 2014 4:21am
Quoting aristid
I think this move-to-BE discussion is too much of a generalisation. Type of entry is hugely important on BE decisions. Inside bars are breakouts and carry a much higher risk of whipsaw/revisit of entry price, which is why Peter Crowns leaves the stop where it is. FBs are exhaustion / rubber band / -call them what you will- and carry less risk of a revisit. Fantastic high momentum moves will not be missed by the BE-moving-too-soon traders. But will be missed by retrace hunters. PIPeasy used / (potentially uses) momentum and seems very relaxed moving...
IMO I don't think anyone distorted G's teachings regarding BE. If anyone did, then the burden of proof remains on your part to show who did and explain how. I would be more than happy to correct my views if I did.

However I believe some of your claims regarding chart setups and BE are infact generalisations. I will explain why and how it is so.

First, it is not the inside bar itself that carry a much higher risk of whipsaw/revist of entry price. Rather it is the inside bars that DO RETRACE after the breakout that carry a much high risk of whipsaw/revisit of entry price. WHY? Because if the price retraces after after the breakout then there is a lack of momentum to push the price further into the intended direction as well as the fact that the price remains closer to the entry price. Hence it is more precise to say that a person who trades EACH AND EVERY inside bars BLINDLY that carries a high risk of whipsaw/revist of entry price because not all inside bars are the same.

Second, your claims regarding FB (Flying Buddah) carries a hindsight bias. Only the FB that actually do work out favorably carry less risk of a visit because reversals are the apex of change in direction and positions in those areas no doubt has a higher chance to survive than the positions stacked in the same direction afterwards. But how do we know whether a FB is going to work out favorably beforehand when Joe himself has only a slightly better than 40% success rate? Based on those odds of less than 50% sucess rate, if you trade EACH AND EVERY FB BLINDLY, it actually carries more risk of a revisit and even more so that trading inside bars blindly based on Peter Crown's rules. Why? Because entering on FB you are effectively trading against the current trend in an attempt to pick tops and bottoms, whereas trading inside bars blinding based on Peter Crown's rules at least tries to follow the trend.

Ask yourself this:

Which carries higher risk of revisit of entry price? Against the trend or for the trend?

Lastly, the claim that "Fantastic high momentum moves will not be missed by the BE-moving-too-soon traders. But will be missed by retrace hunters" has no premise to begin with. Moving a position to BE has nothing to do with missing a move or not missing a move. You have not mentioned a type of ENTRY method that does not miss the so called "fantastic high momentum moves" that moves the position to BE shortly after. As for "retrace hunters" high momentum moves can occur at times after a retrace, especially when SL and BE of retail traders are taken out. Hence I don't see how your claim that retrace hunters miss those moves hold true.

I will leave it up to you to do the explaining.
  • #6,751
  • Edited 7:26am Oct 20, 2014 6:01am | Edited 7:26am
dear yonseo,

while you seem like a very cool and likeable guy, I get the feeling you have a tendency to promote round-in-circles/chicken-or-egg type conversations, which I personally dislike. I will -partly- reply to your post but will not be dragged into such a conversation as they bore me to tears plus I am rather busy.

I have a pretty good feel of what G has said and although he has discussed partial exits and paying for the privilege of keeping stoploss unmoved, his preference and basic teaching on the subject was to move to BE rather quickly. If eye-popping momentum was not there he was not keen on staying in. He disliked retraces.
Please understand I have no intentions of giving you the exact posts etc, this would be even more waste of time.

Here is what you said next: "it is the inside bars that DO RETRACE that carry a high risk of retracing."
100% risk of retrace for those, I'd say. :-)

I am not advocating trading each and every -bar type- blindly. I am personally taking all the entries that meet my -specific- criteria that I can get my hands on. Blindly, if you call this blind. Try taking FBs that are also the first opposing candle and at a good technical level, you'll get much better numbers.

It is good that you know you prefer PC's inside bars, no problem. Inside bars are contraction, FBs are exhaustion plays. Different things. They have their characteristics.
An FB play may be an exhaustion of a higher timeframe's retrace. Sorry to be blunt but once again, cliche generalisations abound, on "with the trend", customary negativity on "picking tops and bottoms" etc.

Here is one of today's FBs (the one I mentioned before, AUDJPY)

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot2.png Size: 120 KB


This 1H FB is definitely against the 1H trend, but is it against the daily trend? How do you define your trend? G talked about Inception.
You dont need to like it.

About your last paragraph, I find it unfair that I have to do the explaining since you created it.
Here's a try.
A move is a different thing from an entry. I do not have to mention an entry when I talk about a high momentum move.
If your entry is after a momentum move has occured (like waiting for a retrace from it) you are running a risk of not getting on board - move missed.
If you move your stoploss to BE rather quickly and you happen to already be on such a move (a move that does not retrace to your BE point, remember), then, by definition, you BE will not be hit.
Once again, these are characteristics, I happen to do both, but it is not about what I do.
Retrace plays can have their SLs moved to BE quickly, one does not exclude the other. And its all relative anyway.
Taking a 50% (or open of candle, whatever) retrace on 4H or an FB on 15min at the same level, do you see a difference? Only risk-wise. The FB player will be risking less. And staring at his screen more.
  • #6,752
  • Oct 20, 2014 7:39am Oct 20, 2014 7:39am
Dear aristid,


You wrote:

<<while you seem like a very cool and likeable guy, I get the feeling you have a tendency to promote round-in-circles/chicken-or-egg type conversations, which I personally dislike. I will -partly- reply to your post but will not be dragged into such a conversation as they bore me to tears plus I am rather busy.>>

While I am quite sure your a nice guy in real life, I am only interested in the issue at hand. Of course there are those in FF with some serious ego problems when discussing differences of opinion regarding trading, as well as those who resort to personal attacks because others don't agree with their rigid views. I am glad to see that you too are making an attempt to deal with the issue at hand. Although to me it seems you are implicitly changing the subject.

If you make a claim based on what you think or feel but others disagree, then only when we give reasons for our basis can we make a meaningful disagreement possible. Whether you choose to back up your claims (whether it is due to time constaints, ego problems etc) or not is your choice and no one is forcing you to respond. It is your free will and choice.


You wrote:

<<I have a pretty good feel of what G has said and although he has discussed partial exits and paying for the privilege of keeping stoploss unmoved, his preference and basic teaching on the subject was to move to BE rather quickly. If eye-popping momentum was not there he was not keen on staying in. He disliked retraces.
Please understand I have no intentions of giving you the exact posts etc, this would be even more waste of time.>>

Here is the problem. "Waste of time" is usually a convenient excuse to those that cannot back up their claims or those who cannot admit they're wrong. "Waste of time" is a valid excuse to those that gave solid reasons but the other person chooses not to deal with the issue at hand whether it is due to deliberate or whether it is due to ignorance.

When you make a claim but you dont back up your statements, it has 2 major implications:

1. If your claim is not true then you are misrepresenting G as well as misleading the readers who are new to trading.
2. Even if your statement is true, it will seem like a generalisation at face value.


You wrote:

<<Here is what you said next: "it is the inside bars that DO RETRACE that carry a high risk of retracing."
100% risk of retrace for those, I'd say. :-)

I am not advocating trading each and every -bar type- blindly. I am personally taking all the entries that meet my -specific- criteria that I can get my hands on. Blindly, if you call this blind. Try taking FBs that are also the first opposing candle and at a good technical level, you'll get much better numbers.

It is good that you know you prefer PC's inside bars, no problem. Inside bars are contraction, FBs are exhaustion plays. Different things. They have their characteristics.

An FB play may be an exhaustion of a higher timeframe's retrace. Sorry to be blunt but once again, cliche generalisations abound, on "with the trend", customary negativity on "picking tops and bottoms" etc.>>

This only proves you did infact make a generalization in your previous post where you said:

"Inside bars are breakouts and carry a much higher risk of whipsaw/revisit of entry price, which is why Peter Crowns leaves the stop where it is.
FBs are exhaustion / rubber band / -call them what you will- and carry less risk of a revisit."

Since no one is accusing you of advocating trading each and every bar blindly, we can move on.


You wrote:

<<This 1H FB is definitely against the 1H trend, but is it against the daily trend? How do you define your trend? G talked about Inception.You dont need to like it.>>

You make a good point about how one chooses to define trend. This is subjective and there is more than one way to define it. The question "Which carries higher risk of revisit of entry price? Against the trend or for the trend?" remains unanswered but thats ok because any trader with practical common sense knows the answer.


You wrote:

<<About your last paragraph, I find it unfair that I have to do the explaining since you created it.
Here's a try.
A move is a different thing from an entry. I do not have to mention an entry when I talk about a high momentum move.
If your entry is after a momentum move has occured (like waiting for a retrace from it) you are running a risk of not getting on board - move missed.
If you move your stoploss to BE rather quickly and you happen to already be on such a move (a move that does not retrace to your BE point, remember), then, by definition, you BE will not be hit.
Once again, these are characteristics, I happen to do both, but it is not about what I do.
Retrace plays can have their SLs moved to BE quickly, one does not exclude the other. And its all relative anyway.>>

You don't have to do the explaining. You made the statement in your previous post:

"Fantastic high momentum moves will not be missed by the BE-moving-too-soon traders. But will be missed by retrace hunters."

Which don't really add up to what you recently said. Hence another proof of generalisation.


You wrote:

<<Taking a 50% (or open of candle, whatever) retrace on 4H or an FB on 15min at the same level, do you see a difference? Only risk-wise. The FB player will be risking less. >>

Another generalisation. No need to provide further explaination if you don't want to.


Moral of the story:

No point making claims about other people's discussions being generalisations when the claims themselves are infact the generalisations.
  • #6,753
  • Oct 20, 2014 8:30am Oct 20, 2014 8:30am
yonseo,
thanks for your reply.

after reading your post, a few things are evident to me.
1. your entire post is one big confirmation of my initial feeling that you like merry-go-round / chicken-or-egg affairs
2. if you didn't understand a single sentence of what I said, you are most likely not going to in the future. I think you got the picture though. I mean the screenshot.
3. this is going nowhere

like I said, I will not be participating.
I do however apologise for my harshness of tone, I am certain I would enjoy discussing trading in person with you.
I think it is because there is too many people talking too much nonsense, I wish they would do it someplace else. I am following the thread because I was on the lookout for anything concerning the techniques taught by PIPeasy. It is my mistake though, I really should dis-associate the teachings from the noise that came afterwards. The teaching is quite complete.

I believe I will be contributing in the future with some of my observations as I am actively and seriously pursuing the methodology.

cheers.
aristides.
  • #6,754
  • Oct 20, 2014 8:33am Oct 20, 2014 8:33am
Quoting fillup
hello to everyone on this thread. i have found the first few pages by the author really interesting; however when trying to open his posted charts am having pictures of an owl on the page. i would like to see the charts if possible before proceding further with the thread to maintain the overall consistency of the original postings. i'm hoping by posting at the end of the thread here, that somebody will either tell me why they are missing, or point me in the right direction to see them, or share their own originals again. many thanks to you, and...

i know its not even 24hrs old yet, but i''m keen to know someones thoughts who has been around this thread for awhile
again thanks
  • #6,755
  • Oct 20, 2014 9:06am Oct 20, 2014 9:06am
Hello fillup,

at the very top of this page you will find a little paperclip+number (1014 right now) that will lead you to the thread's attachments.
you need to download the "graeme posts only" zip file that contains 2 pdfs with PIPeasy's posts + pictures that are now gone.
there are additional posts beyond the ones in the pdfs that are also essential reading, but you will have to locate them yourself (it is not difficult through PIPeasy's profile). As far as I know noone has posted a file of the final posts and their pictures cannot be obtained. If anyone has them I'd enjoy taking a look also.

best of luck.
  • #6,756
  • Oct 20, 2014 10:07am Oct 20, 2014 10:07am
many thanks aristid
i never knew that function was there and how to use it, illuminating.
if you want to see those charts that are missing from the thread at the beginning then check out the pdf by jaquemate i think is the uploader.
again thanks as may never have found this and i believe will make some difference to my interpretation of pipeasy's postings.
as i stated before i have only just started reading this thread;and out of some of the stuff on FF this is the first post on a subject that i think really deserves some credit.
all the best
  • #6,757
  • Oct 20, 2014 1:49pm Oct 20, 2014 1:49pm
In regards to SL and BE discussion (painful to read long posts!) and to confuse new readers even further (my apologies!).....You are trading against some of the smartest opponents in this industry. I fail to understand why you would want to disclose your INTENTIONS and actions that will take place in the future? Focus on taking liquidity instead of offerring ! In my opinion, trading should be as much descrete as possible. No one should be able to decipher your setups. How you do that? By not having any setups based on indicators or price action or whatever. You only enter the playing field when there is a legit move. You gauge the movement just in time in this very moment to assess the long term effects of the move. Beat the casino by playing more often rather than putting all your chips on one table. casinos want their parking lots filled with cars everyday to not worry about their jackpot losses.same concept applies here...trade small, trade often, keep moving across slot machines, if it gives, try and take some more.

Just a perspective which expires in 24 hours :-)
Staying in my lane...
  • #6,758
  • Edited 3:31pm Oct 20, 2014 3:08pm | Edited 3:31pm
Quoting MCRotter
... That is the second time in a few short hours I have heard a person saying you need 5 years to get your act together
The guys are right and I am saying that the third! Exactly four years ago I posted a few indicators in this forum, and now I want to program something new until the end of the fifth year...
Is anyone from the experienced Milliped traders still interested to discuss/develope new ideas, possibly in a new thread?
  • #6,759
  • Oct 20, 2014 3:28pm Oct 20, 2014 3:28pm
Is it right that not closing trades at all, so you never have a TP, is better than any other R:R approach. That of course means that we open trades in both directions whenever there is a signal for one or the other side and just let the positions run infinitely and set positions to BE when they are in profit. Is that true? I thought I read it somewhere, maybe it was even in this thread. Does anyone now something more specific which is mathematically proven?
  • #6,760
  • Oct 20, 2014 3:56pm Oct 20, 2014 3:56pm
Quoting SwingMan
{quote} The guys are right and I am saying that the third! Exactly four years ago I posted a few indicators in this forum, and now I want to program something new until the end of the fifth year... Is anyone from the experienced Milliped traders still interested to discuss/develope new ideas, possibly in a new thread?

HI a few years back , i started some concepts on using "The Millipede " for my Position/Swing trading plans
i also incorporated the DIBS method .. ie. IBs which we actually developed into an EA ...

i share the stuff here.. as i actually never get really back to it... as iam not a big fan of troubleshooting EAs etc.. ( the EA got coded by a second person)
i lost interrest ... simple as that

the swing/position trading plans will get inuse at a later stage in my trading career.. as i actually only trade DAX intraday as of now and iam quite happy with that

anyhow do what u want with it..


SwingPositionPlan (new) (draft)
Attached File(s)
File Type: pdf SwingTradePlan.pdf   192 KB | 1,251 downloads

DIBS+Millipede (concept)
Attached File(s)
File Type: pdf DIBSMilipede.pdf   103 KB | 1,444 downloads

InsideBar EA concept for developer
Attached File(s)
File Type: pdf InsideBarEA.pdf   123 KB | 881 downloads

InsideBar Prototyp BUGfix
Attached File(s)
File Type: pdf InsideBarEAprototypeBugFix.pdf   52 KB | 868 downloads


InsideBar EA
Attached File(s)
File Type: ex4 Inside Bar EA.EX4   35 KB | 518 downloads

InsideBar EA (source code)
Attached File(s)
File Type: mq4 Inside Bar EA.MQ4   45 KB | 639 downloads
8 traders viewing now