Thanks Steve, downloaded - will advise back after running it a while.
Appreciate that you took the time to humour me and my request!
Appreciate that you took the time to humour me and my request!
Broker Challenge "NDD/STP" vs. True "ECN" and "Mkt Mkr" broker talk 46 replies
Scalping Awesome "Crocodile" 13 replies
Dealing with "Invalid Price", "Requote", "Server Busy" in MT4 3 replies
Trading System using Awesome Oscillator 48 replies
SteveHopwood EAs 4 replies
Disliked
Awesome
This is not a ludicrous claim by me about the power of the EA. I have named the robot to reflect the pdf that posits the system it trades. Read about the system in the pdf; once you get your head around it, it is as easy as shelling peas.Ignored
Disliked
- The new trade doesn't have to be so big, instead of a 2nd trade of 0.03 a 0.02 is enough, following by a 0.04, 0.08, 0.16 etc. etc. When my calculations are right, you end up with less than 1/2 of the margin required from the original method.
- The spread doesn't interfere with the SL/ TP anymore [see previous post].
Please share your thoughts about this...
Best,
GertjanIgnored
DislikedGertjan, There is an option in the EA MartingaleMultiplier, in that if you set it to 2...The lots would be 0.01, 0.02, 0.04, 0.08....and so on...
However, the issue with going above lot is..the lots cancels itself with no profit no loss..i tried the set up with 2 multiplier in demo and there were no profit no loss..only if the first lot 0.01 is right we get profit else all other lot cancels itself...
I'm not sure, however, it has to be triple the lots from the first one to be profitable...you can check it out in demo....ThanksIgnored
DislikedHi Steve,
This is the best and easiest way to make money in Forex, I had a blast the last 2 days, making 1.000,- + a day untill last night.....
[using the original Awesome, without the FH part]
On two occasions the SL of the losing orders was triggered before the TP of the winning orders, and after that the price reversed making another [bigger] loss. Both were already on the 2.4 lot level....
I see 2 way's to prevent this happening;
- Incorporate the spread in the TP/ SL calculation, so all are triggered at the same time [for example, make...Ignored
DislikedHi Spiderman,
Thanks for your reply, it seems I didn't express myself as clear as I would.
My idea is that the SL is moved to the entrypoint of the opposite trade, so a 30 pip SL and a 30 pip TP with a 'box' of 30 pips.
This way there is only 1 order open at a time, and with the lotsize-sequence you mentioned, there will always be 30 pips profit once the sequence is closed with a TP.
short 0.01: -30*1= -30
long 0.02: -30*2= -60
short 0.04: -30*4= -120
long 0.08: +30*8= +240 [-30-60-120] = +30
long 0.01: -30*1 = -30
short 0.02: +30*2 = +60 [-30]...Ignored
Dislikedgreat idea....however, at what point should we move the stop loss to the entry point of the opposite trade...Im sorry im a bit confused...did you meant...we only open one single trade at a time and when that trade moves + or - 30 pips we open the next trade in the opposite direction of the first?Ignored
DislikedTo over come the issue of margin and martingale increase in choppy sessions. I have increased the size of the gap from 30/60 to 75/150 now. With this, the martingale rarely passes 0.01, 0.03 lots...It would be extremely bad day for a pair to cross/chop 75 pips three four times a day, i have only seen this happening three four times a year in 5 years of trading now...and never more than that...so, we would very very rarely cross 0.01, 0.03, 0.06, 0.012 lots not more than that ..
Also, the good thing with increase in gap is the profit from first...Ignored
SPREAD
I noticed that the take profit and stop loss are the same value. i.e., spread is not being factored in. This has caused me to manually close some trades when the SL of one was reached but due to the spread in between, the TP of the other wasn't reached. From here, I discovered it will be more accurate if we factor in the spread of the ccy.
Lets say the spread of EurUsd is 2pips, then this should be factored into the TP and SL calculations. Awesome should be able to do this so all trades will be closed at once.
TP and SL
I noticed that the worst Awesome can do is BE. But with a 10pips change, one can turn Awesome into a winner at all times. Right now, Awesome has a TP of 30pips and an SL of 60pips. With this, if a sequence is on, it will only BE.
IF we add a 10pips change to the SL, the first trade will close at -70pips * 1 while the other trade will close at +40pips * 2. From this little change of 10pips, Awesome will no longer be a BE bot but instead, a sure winner. This pips change can be increased per user preference. Don't forget to factor in the spread in this calculation also thus making the overall profit 8pips on EurUsd.
I still have 3 more things to add to the EA but right now, am not able to lay my hands on them. Will post them later.
DislikedNot really, leave the system the way it is, but shift the SL to the entrypoint of the new trade and make it a 1, 2, 4 sequence. If a trade results in a TP, re-start the sequence from scratch.
Interesting idea, I'll try that. Can you explain where and how to put the RSI in the set-file as you have it?Ignored
TREND DETECTION
I noticed that Awesome uses the one hour RSI to determine trend. Not that this is bad, but i think its lagging in relation to recent movements in the markets.
Whenever there is a big move in the opposite direction of the one hr trend, the best Awesome can do is BE. There are times the big move will be over 100pips and Awesome won't be able to make "anything" out of it. i think there should be a change.
My proposition is that Awesome should use the 5minutes chart to determine its trend. Since there are 12 five minutes candles in an hour, then we can tell Awesome to consider the trend to be up or down when the price is above or below the 48EMA (4hrs). This will help Awesome adapt better to the market movements even in volatile times.
We can even adapt it to 1min TF, its all a matter of choice. I think this should be made input-able based on user preferences.
MONEY MANAGEMENT
I think it will be better if this is factored into the inputs of Awesome. Lets say there is an option to tell the bot not to risk more that x% of the account for the maximum number of trades the user specified, wont it save the user from margin call, negative margin etc?
If for instance, the user ask the bot not to risk more than 5% of his balance for the maximum number of 5 trades, I think on the overall, even if Awesome does not BE, the trader will not loose more than the 5% he specified. I think this will better protect users account alongside the BE mode.
These are the mods I propose hoping to make Awesome better.