I see. That's quite different from what I've been working on. Once a trade reaches profit, I close it. Different approach to yours.

Drawdown level - No significant difference between the 2 DCA methods. But maybe I misunderstood. What criteria do you use to assess if price is "moving in the same direction as the original trade"? I'm assuming it's adding onto losing positions ...

No significant difference over time it seems. U tried and had any luck?

In phase 2, the DD levels were the same. The only way to reduce it is to introduce a more accurate entry method other than random. But the position mgt bit worked as it should.

If you are using this to trade, do bear in mind that you are taking on a disproportionate amount of risk corresponding to a less significant amount of potential profit. Most of the martingale-based strategies rely on the same principles. Quadratic ...

It's been 2 years since I last posted on this thread. A recent FF member reminded me of this thread. You do see some similar threads around in the forum but nothing too serious. Quite the thrill, entering randomly in the markets and coming out on ...

Closing the trades at one go upon $x profit is one way to do it. You could also consider letting the trades run but reducing the total trade exposure down bit by bit. It sounds abstract but this allows you to maximize your upside while keeping the ...

This is an interesting idea. Even though both ways could be traded. The reverse would be attempts on identifying tops and bottoms. Will be giving this a shot and see if it works well with my existing algos. I would pair this up with higher ...

Interesting posts. I'm running something similar but with 28 pairs. Returns aren't as aggressive as yazzie's but so is the DD.

It's not just about your forward test. What about your tick by tick backtest results for the last 10 years?

This thread has an interesting premise. I've always been toying around with this idea in an effort to turn this into an acceptable strategy. The idea is always to enter with a reasonable entry criteria, and attach a stubborn exit to it. This ...

It honestly surprises me when I still hear from other traders that their edge has to do with themselves, either related to patience, mindset, control of emotions, or some sort of characteristic / trait that lies within. I have the utmost respect for ...

Maybe a better way to look at this is - There are certain trades that provide a higher probability of success vs others. You need to take a good look at how historical prices move, and the most fundamental way of doing so is looking at OHLC data. ...

There is a lot you could glean from the concept of time. Try looking at things at a statistical point of view. Collect as much data as you can and plot price against time. You would be surprised at what you could find. Using candlesticks alone you ...

Hey my friend - Yes I'm still using a version of this, and it's pretty much almost the exact same approach.

There are a lot of data points that you could glean from waves in general. Try looking at this from a statistical point of view on when and to what degree the waves begin and end. That is as close to a holy grail that I could think of. I haven't ...

This was also discussed in another thread here: url

Then you're alr halfway there. Let's say you use x% profit as your threshold. Once that threshold is met, start trailing at that level. No harm doing since since you are guaranteerd that x% and if price continues moving in your favour, u get x% and ...

The DDs will always be there. What I described was for a ZR system, and the group trailing stop does not apply to individual trades, but a basket of trades. Hard to explain as I'm typing on phone. May share details when I find time

One solution to the varying degrees of TPs is a group trailing stop. Use dollar value as your parameter and once that parameter has been reached, move your group trailing stop along, like you would in a traditional single-trade trailing stop. With ...