https://www.mql5.com/en/code/10890

G.

On EA’s StopLoss:

Instead of using just ATR factor for SL, we can use some more “inteligent” approach, such as the Max or Min value between our current ATR and the latest Peak/Trough.

Such as:

SL = Min(SL_Factor*ATR, iHighest(NULL,0,MODE_HIGH,10,1))

This will result in shorter, but logical, SL that will increase the LOt size ands profits -…[Read more]

Try 3 & 5 sma’s on the USDx. More responsive.

I’m interested in your code for comparison.  SHOUT!!

G.

Ea Status:

Still missing Functions/Modules:

1. MySentiment – User Parameter implementation

2. Currency-Strength – Issue not yet concluded, which CS indicator to use or its parameters.

Finished/Closed issues:

ClearMethod (CM) – Use simplex HTF CM histogram

VZO – use VZO (or ForexGT’s VolumeOsc) indicator latest version, still need s…[Read more]

Ea Status:

Still missing Functions/Modules:

1. MySentiment – User Parameter implementation

2. Currency-Strength – Issue not yet concluded, which CS indicator to use or its parameters.

Finished/Closed issues:

ClearMethod (CM) – Use simplex HTF CM histogram

VZO – use VZO indicator latest version, still need suggestions for stable p…[Read more]

Ea Status:

Still missing Functions/Modules:

1. MySentiment – User Parameter implementation

2. Currency-Strength – Issue not yet concluded, which CS indicator to use or its parameters.

Finished/Closed issues:

ClearMethod (CM) – Use simplex HTF CM histogram

VZO – use VZO indicator latest version, still need suggestions for stable p…[Read more]

Ok with me, as long as each module/Function is stand-alone and the logic is easily inserted within it, and the return value remains the same.

G.

Ok with me, as long as each module/Function is stand-alone and the logic in easily inserted within it, and the return value remains the same.

G.

Ok with me, as long as each module/Function is stand-alone and theat logic in easily inserted within it, and the return value remains the same.

G.

Wrong.

1. ClearMethod is on current TF, consulting Higher TF’s for overall Trend.

2. Currency-Strength is on current TF, (optionally consulting LOWER TF for same direction confirmation).

3. VolumeOsc (or VZO) is on current TF only.

G.

Agree.

Check once and use RefreshRates() before each entry (OrderSend(…).

G.

Detailed FACTS doesn’t really matter.

Semantics, Point of View, and Perspective is all that matter.

I’m gone too – to reflect on other “perspectives”…

Good luck and Green Pips.

G.

In real-life, I stay away from any kind of MA. It was just an example to show that your categoric statement is mathematically wrong.

G.

1. Volume is NOT price. In Forex, Volume is market activity – the number of transactions that causes a price to move.

2. Perspective and point of view can differ. Facts can’t.

3. Indicator can “Indicate” coming event  – or just follow price-action in a lagging manner, which make it useless. For that purpose you should use chart candles…[Read more]

MA(3) uses only the last 3 values. That’s why it’s called “Moving Average”…

G.

It’s NOT semantics.

What’s the point in creating new indicator if you are just chasing price-action?

What’s the point of using just RSI (another Price-Action, and VERY lagging. BTW:CCI is better and faster for that purpose) to model Currency-Strength?

If you are into 30-40% of long-term trend, you don’t need all those fancy…[Read more]

It’s NOT semantics.

What’s the point in creating new indicator if you are just chasing price-action?

What’s the point of using just RSI (another Price-Action, and VERY lagging. BTW:CCI is better and faster for that purpose) to model Currency-Strength?

If you are into 30-40% of long-term trend, you don’t need all those fancy…[Read more]

It’s NOT semantics.

What’s the point in creating new indicator if you are chasing just price-action?

What’s the point of using just RSI (another Price-Action, and VERY lagging) to model Currency-Strength?

If you are into 30-40% of long-term trend, you don’t need all those fancy indicators.

The facts in FX market are:

Volume precede Price…[Read more]

Oh, really?

Price(t1) = 6, Price(t2)=7  —>  Diff=1.

MA(t1)={4,5,6), MA(t2)={4,5,6,7)  —> MA(t1,3)=5, MA(t2,3)=6   —>   Diff=1

So, in the above private case, MA’s Diff is equal to actual price Diff. and that’s just simple SMA. So your statement isn’t ALWAYS right…

It’s so easy to throw pseudo-math statements and theories, withou…[Read more]

Oh, really?

Price(t1) = 6, Price(t2)=7  —>  Diff=1.

MA(t1)={4,5,6), MA(t2)={4,5,6,7)  —> MA(t1,3)=5, MA(t2,3)=6   —>   Diff=1

So, in the above private case, MA’s Diff is equal to actual price Diff. So your statement isn’t ALWAYS right…

G.