Can someone code this hedging EA? | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Can someone tell me what's wrong with my code? 7 replies

Can someone please explain Hedging 2 replies

Can someone give me a link to Hedging EA please? 0 replies

Can someone code this,please? 1 reply

Can someone code this into MT4 it is a future prodicting MA line 1 reply

Attachments: Can someone code this hedging EA?
Exit Attachments

Can someone code this hedging EA?

  • #1
  • First Post: Jun 1, 2015 10:39am Jun 1, 2015 10:39am
Hi,

Can someone code an EA for me with this strategy

Open both Buy and Sell trades on the same pair.
After every 1hours or 4hours close the trade in profit and take a new trade on the same direction again.
eg. if I close buy trade with a profit, I will be opening new buy trade again to continue the hedge

Thanks
  • #2
  • Jun 1, 2015 11:11am Jun 1, 2015 11:11am
Quoting dranzer006
if I close buy trade with a profit, I will be opening new buy trade again to continue the hedge
What is the purpose of closing the BUY if you re-open the same BUY position ? The only thing you are doing is to pay again the spread and commission to keep your position opened ...
MT4/MT5 EAs/Indicators/Alerts coder
  • #3
  • Jun 1, 2015 11:29am Jun 1, 2015 11:29am
Quoting dranzer006
Hi, Can someone code an EA for me with this strategy Open both Buy and Sell trades on the same pair. After every 1hours or 4hours close the trade in profit and take a new trade on the same direction again. eg. if I close buy trade with a profit, I will be opening new buy trade again to continue the hedge Thanks
.................
  • #4
  • Jun 1, 2015 1:04pm Jun 1, 2015 1:04pm
When do you close a loosing position? - this ind of strategy will make some money in a ranging markt but you have to do something with the negative trades,,,, you can't leave them opened for ever
DON'T TRADE THE DIRECTION, TRADE THE MOVE
  • #5
  • Jun 1, 2015 5:53pm Jun 1, 2015 5:53pm
You didn't get the point once a trade is in profit you book this profit and re-open a new trade in same direction in which you closed the first one so the hedge continues.


here's the video from which i got this
Inserted Video
  • #6
  • Jun 1, 2015 6:51pm Jun 1, 2015 6:51pm
Quoting dranzer006
You didn't get the point once a trade is in profit you book this profit and re-open a new trade in same direction in which you closed the first one so the hedge continues.
Just do the math and you will see that it is the same as keeping the position opened instead of reopening the exact same position. You lost the spread + commission in the close+open ... The whole P/L (from your starting point) is still the same with your new hedge.
MT4/MT5 EAs/Indicators/Alerts coder
  • #7
  • Jun 1, 2015 7:54pm Jun 1, 2015 7:54pm
Over time, the gap between the BUY and SELL orders will be getting wider. Hence, if market ranges, the trades can't even be closed for a profit (that is if it oscillates between the BUY and SELL trades. Even though the trades are closed (BUY and SELL), the equity will stay much or less the same(ignoring spread and commission).

So there won't be any money made whether the market is ranging or trending.
  • #8
  • Jun 1, 2015 9:13pm Jun 1, 2015 9:13pm
Quoting flowerhorn
So there won't be any money made whether the market is ranging or trending.
That's exactly the point ...
MT4/MT5 EAs/Indicators/Alerts coder
  • #9
  • Jun 1, 2015 9:41pm Jun 1, 2015 9:41pm
The gullible are fooled by methods such as this because the account balance keeps rising because the balance only includes closed trades.
Equity is the important balance and will just keep dropping because of the cost of the spread, commissions and swaps
Please Do Not PM Me With Coding Enquiries
  • #10
  • Jun 1, 2015 10:14pm Jun 1, 2015 10:14pm
This is a negative expectancy system.

Over time your equity will be eroded by the cost of opening positions.

You're not actually "booking profits" every time you close and reopen the trade in the same direction.

Also, as a side note. Opening a long+short in the same pair is not hedging. Hedging is where you are taking opposing positions in different, but related securities. Long+short on the same instrument is called "locking" or a "nedge". In itself it a nedge is inherently impotent.
Follow me on twitter @FxLester
  • #11
  • Jun 1, 2015 11:26pm Jun 1, 2015 11:26pm
This is a really bad idea. You would probably be better off with some type of grid system.
  • #12
  • Jun 2, 2015 12:28am Jun 2, 2015 12:28am
I already know this system isn't profitable, what I'm asking for is an EA so that I can later on fine-tune this method, i want the EA so that I can get a better understanding of the hedging technique. If everything goes well I will be developing a proper system that will be profitable.
  • #13
  • Jun 2, 2015 1:03am Jun 2, 2015 1:03am
I believe that you will have difficulties finding someone to code an EA for free when they know that it cannot be profitable.
How can you fine tune it? If you do manage to get it coded, you will probably bug the coder for all manner of hare-brained ideas for modifications that will not work.
Probably, the only way to make it profitable would be with some sort of martingale.
I am pretty sure that most coders know that martingale can give profits and appear great until the inevitable time that it blows the account.
Please Do Not PM Me With Coding Enquiries
  • #14
  • Jun 2, 2015 1:17am Jun 2, 2015 1:17am
Quoting dranzer006
I already know this system isn't profitable, what I'm asking for is an EA so that I can later on fine-tune this method, i want the EA so that I can get a better understanding of the hedging technique. If everything goes well I will be developing a proper system that will be profitable.
Why don't you focus on trading instead of trying to beat the market ?
MT4/MT5 EAs/Indicators/Alerts coder
  • #15
  • Jun 2, 2015 1:20am Jun 2, 2015 1:20am
Quoting dranzer006
I already know this system isn't profitable, what I'm asking for is an EA so that I can later on fine-tune this method, i want the EA so that I can get a better understanding of the hedging technique. If everything goes well I will be developing a proper system that will be profitable.
You have a similar hedging system (this version lets the winners run, but you can change/play with this in the code) source code at abokwaik's Robot lab.

Cheers,
k
  • #16
  • Edited 1:53am Jun 2, 2015 1:28am | Edited 1:53am
Quoting FxLester
Opening a long+short in the same pair is not hedging. Hedging is where you are taking opposing positions in different, but related securities. Long+short on the same instrument is called "locking" or a "nedge". In itself it a nedge is inherently impotent.
The nedging grid: Imagine that you have buy and sell grids of orders every 100 pips in EURUSD, each order with a 100 pip trailing SL. Assuming a linear movement say up, your losses in the sell grid will be linear (your SL are activated at the next point in the losing grid), whereas the wins of the buy grid will scale quadratically (since you add to the winners). The losses of this system will only occur with cyclical/whipsaw movement of the order of the grid size.
So it is not true that "nedging" is "inherently impotent". It is just that you lack imagination.

Cheers,
k
  • #17
  • Jun 2, 2015 2:23am Jun 2, 2015 2:23am
I agree with all the above..
Attached File(s)
File Type: ex4 dranzer006_zero-sum_0.01.ex4   270 KB | 944 downloads
  • #18
  • Jun 2, 2015 4:49am Jun 2, 2015 4:49am
Quoting kprsa
{quote} The nedging grid: Imagine that you have buy and sell grids of orders every 100 pips in EURUSD, each order with a 100 pip trailing SL. Assuming a linear movement say up, your losses in the sell grid will be linear (your SL are activated at the next point in the losing grid), whereas the wins of the buy grid will scale quadratically (since you add to the winners). The losses of this system will only occur with cyclical/whipsaw movement of the order of the grid size. So it is not true that "nedging" is "inherently impotent". It is just that...
My statement that in itself a nedge is inherently impotent stays true. I was referring to the nedge in itself.

I wasn't talking about grids. I wasn't talking about quadratic scaling. I was talking about a simple buy + sell on the same instrument. Singular. By itself. I hope you understand this.

Read my post.

Quoting kprsa
{quote} whereas the wins of the buy grid will scale quadratically (since you add to the winners)
Unless you progressively double and quadruple each "winner's" trade, you will not be quadratically scaling. Unless heavy martingale is your thing, then this doesn't make sense. That's the only way the increases can be quadratic. Good luck in ranging markets.

Quoting kprsa
{quote} It is just that you lack imagination
Thanks for taking my statement out of context and reminding me about the massive egos on this forum!
Follow me on twitter @FxLester
  • #19
  • Jun 2, 2015 5:06am Jun 2, 2015 5:06am
Quoting FxLester
Unless you progressively double and quadruple each "winner's" trade, you will not be quadratically scaling. Unless heavy martingale is your thing, then this doesn't make sense to me.
Also your math skills leave a lot to be desired.

You do not need to increase the order size to gain quadratically (which is why adding to the winners is such a good idea).
Let us say that each of your orders gains one unit every 100 pips. After 900 pips in one direction you will have gained 9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1=45 units. Your losing grid, on the other hand, has lost 9 units. Sum total, you win: 45-9=36 units.

The point of my example is to show you that one can construct a reasonable schema even starting from something usually considered a bad practice. With a little out-of-the-box thinking one can find similar examples for three-way hedges, martingales etc.

The cool thing about my example is that it is a pure momentum-based strategy, completely oblivious to direction.

Cheers,
k
  • #20
  • Jun 2, 2015 8:06am Jun 2, 2015 8:06am
Quoting safv6
I agree with all the above.. {file}
Thanks for the EA.
0 traders viewing now