[smallcat]

This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.

Anti wrote:

Ok folks, until I’ve more time to do some tests on stoch, BB, ZZ, and prize, I’d like to discuss further topics. Maybe this one is the most basic one:

As far as I understand it, we deal with two stochastic processes (X,µ,d) on X1 (prize) and X2 (indicator values). But what exactly does that probability statement (1.1) mean and what conclusions can be drawn from it?! Any ideas/suggestions? And how can that lambda be interpret? Eurusdd mentioned that it serves as waiting time … But how exactly?

Thanks for the great post Anti     Waiting time … hm … interesting, but do not know what Eurusdd meant about it in term of Similarity …

 

[smallcat]

This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.

I am agree with @simplex, there is no such “optimal setting” , i think we must spend our time to try, try, try and try, looking for the best setting for each pair, that work on specified TF, under some conditions like  trading session time (asian, europe, us), our trading style, avoid news, kapiere, etc … so, there is no setting that can match all conditions …

Thanks for the reminding of old stuff @anti, i am sure that it will Certainty support our understanding on how the price move based on the simple indicator we have, may be we just need to apply “trying and error” method to get better and better result. As kprsa said, all are related (MA, Stoch, ZZ, Cycle, Channel, etc). Regarding the “flat” line of MA, lets say we have “nearest best setting value”  of MA we can get, so we can see the line “almost flat” on TF H1. In this case can we assume that it represent the “resonance line” of the swing of a pendulum ? Furthermore, may be we can use  Heiken Ashi or other stuff (like BB and its deviation) instead of MA too ? In case of using Excel to draw the line, after we export the OHLC of each candle data to CSV file from MT4 for example, import it to Excel, do we need to create a macro rule in Excel to draw the line, or is there any idea how to do it ?

[smallcat]

Saver0 wrote:

Hi all! A lot has happened in my absence from this community. There were some family things that happened but things has finally returned to “normal” and I’m finding more time to continue my research where I left off. I hope to share my findings with you here and help you all along the way. Continuing from where I left off.. ———————————————- My first goal was to observe the market and understand it’s nature. I have been able to successfully conclude as we would expect, a randomly placed trade would have a random outcome. This means if you randomly place a long or short trade, you would expect to have 50% probability of success (if we exclude the spread/commission). My second goal is to harness the power of money management to increase the odds of winning. Where odds of winning is the net % gain of the account balance. One of the simplest ways to grow your account steadily is to make sure that you are risking/gaining a fixed percentage of account balance rather than a fixed dollar amount. Let’s take a look at the following 2 charts. These are the simulated account balance from a trading system with 56% win rate. The top chart you will see how the account balance grew when on a successful trade a profit of 0.5% was taken and on a losing trade a -0.6% loss was taken. This translated to $5 TP and $6 SL. If I traded a fixed TP and SL $ amount then I would have ended up with about 350% gain. However, if I adjusted size of each new trade, then I would have had 1,200% gain. Even though the win rate of each trade was only 56%, with proper compounding based money management, you can have really good gains. Let me ask a question.. have you ever wondered if there were patterns in the market with high recurrence?

Very interesting @saver0, thanks for this   One question: At your example, “translating” of percentage to fixed money amount ($5 TP & $6 SL in this example), is it including the Commission, Spread, Swap, etc ?

[smallcat]

This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.

THANKS for good posts, discussion, ideas & warning here mates.

Finally I realized that trading his ideas must be very very careful, because trading without SL (to get a good probability of revisit >= 90%) can be very dangerous, in fact: all of my accounts are burned (although they were very promising at the beginning), and if we are using SL in trading, the probability is dropped significantly … is it really profitable, can be profitable, not profitable at all (scam) or may be i just can not find a good way to get good emotional management (besides risk / money management) ? do not know .
A good system (indicators, EA, scripts, libraries, database, whatever) it self can not guarantee success in trading, it is depend mostly on the trader itself, not the system (a perfect entry or perfect trader), like many people said: if a same system is given to 10 peoples, may be just 1 or 2 people can get success with it, and the rest are lost …  
Keltner, Donchian, BB etc are simple channel indicators used commonly in trading and can be profitable too if we know how to use them properly (just quote it from another trader, i still can not get the right way how to use it … lol …).  Example of using this is (combining it with TRZ or other tools) can be seen at old thread @FF, said that the price will be inside the channel most of the time … so if price touch or going out of the channel, it will give a good sign of returning, i think we need a filter (other tool) to make it better. So to say: every system (simple one or complex one) can have good idea inside it, we just need to dig it, trying to apply it with our trading style to build our own system, just like “trying and error” method until we get a really profitable system that match our “trading character” …
Experiments of Anti above are nice (combining the channel with Stochastic), thanks @Anti for this … using Stochastic, RSI, CCI, WPR, etc will give (almost) same result or stochastic is the best among them ? ( or may be i got wrong of the true meaning of Eurusdd’s quote about the price moving is actually a “stochastic process” …    ).

@Anti : do you have a statistic how many good & bad signal is given after the stochastic touch the top/bottom (100 / 0) level ? Just a blitz look at the image: shown us that after touching the top/bottom level, the price is not directly go in the opposite direction (it could be swing around first, up and down, before going to opposite direction). If we are using it at big TF, lets say D1 or H4, may be 5-10 pips can be reached at every signal (with good money management), but can give us some wrong signals if we use it on small TF like M5 or M1.
!!! Thanks again to all of you … 

 

[smallcat]

max wrote:

Hi bro!Do you have a new version of the indicator?or a full version? I have found a bug in your indicator-if you turn off the display of statistics it is not lost.If you do not mind,put a new version or not light.

Hi max,

It is not clear to me. Do you mean the indicator shared by brother Kiads ?

If you mean my indicator, it has bug, so i never share it … i am afraid it will give bad result and bring loss … it is just a “toy” for me to playing around on a demo account

 

[smallcat]

[ delete: posted at wrong thread. sorry … ]

[smallcat]

Great Anti. Number 1 : the previous candles are bearish (2 red candles before the white engulfing bar). While at number 2:   all previous candles are white (all 3 white candles in a row, including the engulfing bar). But i can be wrong though …   Edit : i am agree that to discuss only high probability pattern, not to discuss many patterns. We need only the good one 

 

 

• This reply was modified 10 years, 5 months ago by smallcat.

[smallcat]

simplex wrote:

Hey guys: There were private questions relating our Penguin EA v. 1.4. I just forgot to mention that: you have to permit DLL calls when launching the EA, if you haven’t activated DLL use permanently. The event calendar functions require that. If you do not permit DLL, the EA cannot run. s.

About the indicators. In order the EA to work, we must create a folder name “__EA”  (without double quote) under   …/MQL4/Indicators/  folder , and copy all indicators needed by the EA to this “MQL4/Indicatos/__EA/”  folder.

edit: And thanks for the Pdf too

Great work, thanks a lot Simplex

• This reply was modified 10 years, 5 months ago by smallcat.

[smallcat]

simplex wrote:

I own a car with a six-step gearbox. I’ve never had the idea to use only one of them, let’s say third or fifth gear. When I drive my car I take the freedom to choose between all six gears with regard to the current situation, reflecting my experience as a seasoned driver. It’s the same way I’m using the input parameters of my indicators. It just does not make any sense to use default inputs for each and every comparison with another indicator. If comparison with ForexGT_Spaghetti is that important, I’m ‘again’ calling everybody who has access to that one to make use of the CIX gearbox (input parameters) and try to adjust it in a way that provides the best fit. Starting from that point we might turn this part of our discussion and development in a new direction. I do not have access to ForexGT_Spaghetti, so I can’t provide this specific detail. Apart from that, any idea from any thread contributor leading to an improvement of CIX is most welcome. Best, s. Edit: since I’m not Phil Connors, I’m out of this specific CS part of our discussion and development, until new information is on the table. Following scientific principles, ‘new information’ could be a so far unknown theory, preferrably based on replicable math, or new experimental evidence including detailed setup for everybody competent enough to reproduce the proposed results. This while (true) loop requires a break, re-entry not excluded. Please consider this a call for action targeted at everybody interested in our community project.

Good discussion Simplex … and thanks for the zip file … will try that new toys

[smallcat]

gg53 wrote:

We can currently agree on few key elements of the EA’s Logic: Trend: ClearMethod: simplex latest version with current and 1 or 2 higher TF’s, Trend direction according to HTF, entries on areas of current TF in opposite to Trend direction. TVI (or TickVolume): (Optional) Trend direction defined by above/below zero, entries areas are in opposite direction. Exact bar for entry: VZO (or VolumeOsc): when above/below range, in opposite direction of Trend. Currency-Strength: Here we have a problem… This one should indicate strong/weak currencies (Sentiment) by their location above/below the “0” line. Comparing my ForexGT_Spaghetti with simplex CIX, I found that currencies location in relation to the “0” line are different. We need conclusion on this one. Attached is comparison (CIX is default params, USD majors even, Timeframe normalization) USD both in Green. G.

This is good post G , thanks a lot

[smallcat]

gg53 wrote:

 

This belongs in one of the Currency-Strength threads. I posted my “index” version as a suggestion to simplex CIX addition/option. G.

Thanks a lot G, will look at it again …

[smallcat]

Hi G,

About the market share, do i calculate it based on its pair “portion” ?

USD = ( EURUSDs1 + GBPUSDs2 + AUDUSDs3 … ) / 7.

So, the value of  s1 = mEUR/mUSD ,  s2 = mGBP/mUSD …  where mEUR is the share of EUR and mUSD is the share of USD.

Or we do it for each currency , after all other calculations  like Vol, Momentum, etc  are made :

USD = ( EURUSDd1 + GBPUSDd2 + AUDUSDd3 … ) / 7     => d1 , d2 … is other calculation …

USD = mUSD * USD  … where mUSD is the share of USD

Or if we do it for each currency at the end … may be we do it like this ?

USD =  USD *  mUSD / (mUSD + mEUR + mGBP + mAUD + mNZD + mCAD + mCHF + mJPY)

Thanks in advance G.

[smallcat]

Testing some indicators today … thanks for nice indicators mates

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[smallcat]

may be tomorrow NFP is the show time ??

 

• This reply was modified 10 years, 6 months ago by smallcat.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[smallcat]

simplex wrote:

I think that in one EA there should be only one function that manipulates the SL. And if there’s a good reason for two different functions doing so (one trailing stop function and one break even function) we’ve got two possibilities: either implement some sort of communication protocol between those functions so they can’t work against each other, or change our point of view and postulate that manipulating SL is one general task related to managing our trades, and this general task should be handled in one and only one function. I think the latter would be the safest and easiest way of implementation. s.

Thanks Simplex, this is a good post. This makes sense 

[smallcat]

Lowphat wrote:

6 separate bool toggles for each level. 3 up and 3 down. perhaps in addition to per bar once an alarm gets triggered it can only be can be only reset by touching the middle (ma).

Thanks Lowphat  .. Will test this too …

[smallcat]

simplex wrote:

@smallcat and everybody else interested:

smallcat wrote:

Could you please give reason of using limited global variables ?

Maybe try to change your view on our community project for a short while: consider we’re not only coding one EA, but a collection of flexible and exchangeable trading software modules instead. The overall goal of these modules should be to facilitate coding an EA, and the EAs which are the result of our work are happily accepted as a byproduct. As for global variables, let’s look at a trailing stop function for example. There’s certainly more than only one algorithm to solve this task. We’re starting with algorithm A and implement it:

bool TrailStopA(...) {
if (globalTrailingDistance > 0) {
...
double myLocalVar = someLocalVar + (globalTrailingStep + point) * point;
...
}
}

You see, that function TrailStopA() uses global variables of EA-wide scope to do its job. That way it is interlocked with the EA itself. If you now get a different idea about a TS (let’s say ATR based instead of fixed pips amount) you would write a new function TrailStopB() which uses different global variables. It would work, if done properly. Now consider you have another EA and want to use one of your TS functions in that one. Could you easily implement your function over there? Obviously no: if that EA has different global variable names for TS, you would have to recode your function. That’s not complicated, but a nagging and unnecessary work. Let’s consider your original function looked this way:

bool TrailStopA(double localTrailingDistance, double localTrailingStep) {
if (localTrailingDistance > 0) {
...
double myLocalVar = someLocalVar + (localTrailingStep + point) * point;
...
}
}

Now the TS algorithm works on local parameters, which are handed over at the function’s interface. You do not have to change the function’s code when copying it to another EA. A first step to reusable code is done. The next step might be to move a little bit towards OOP approach. Let’s consider your task does not require 2 parameters, but 10. Your function’s interface would be a bit bulky, and with every new parameter you would have to change not only its interface, but also those 37 code snippets in different projects where you have used your function. Not nice! Simple workaround: all properties that describe our TS are packed in one complex data structure:

struct trailingStopParameters {
double trailingDistance; // trailing distance
double trailingStep; // trailing step
};

trailingStopParameters tsParameters; You would have to initialize your structure once (maybe in event handler OnInit), and then your function would look like this:

bool TrailStopA(trailingStopParameters tsParm) {
if (tsParm.trailingDistance> 0) {
...
double myLocalVar = someLocalVar + (tsParm.trailingStep+ point) * point;
...
}
}

It would be called by something like:

if ( TrailStopA(tsParameters) ) {

...

}

Simple, ok? And now for the really valuable part! What if months later (!!!) you think that it would be a good idea to pass some trigger value to your TS function to tell it whether to get active or not? Do you have to change all those 37 code lines where you have used your function until now? No, you just add the new property to your structure:

struct trailingStopParameters {
double trailingDistance; // trailing distance
double trailingStep; // trailing step
double triggerValue; // TS trigger
};

and use it inside your function:

bool TrailStopA(trailingStopParameters tsParm) {
if (tsParm.triggerValue > 0) {
...
}
if (tsParm.trailingDistance> 0) {
...
double myLocalVar = someLocalVar + (tsParm.trailingStep+ point) * point;
...
}
}

Please note: the function’s interface will not be touched, so you don’t have to change all those code lines where you used it in the past. The only thing you have to care for is to properly initialize the new member of your structure. More than that, the structure keeps together all parameters that are required to describe your trailing stop algorithm. So it acts as a logical bracket connecting all the properties of one object. A lengthy post. @smallcat and everybody else: I hope I managed to describe my view on this topic in a comprehensible way. Any questions / comments / critical addendums? s. (Hmmm … I really hope that code formatting works inside this post!)

Hi Simplex,

Thanks a lot for this post and post #11279, very good and clear explanation … Easy to understand the reason 

And the code formatting works well, including the indent.

Thank you very much Simplex … 

[smallcat]

fuzzy wrote:

Here is the latest NewsCalendar stuff. Talking about Globals. I wacked the whole thing into a class to encapsulate it, as I didn’t want the array exposed. I was thinking about it last week and talked myself into it over the weekend. The only global I now have is the NewsCalendar object that will sit in the indicator or EA. Did some more optimisation re: unnecessary file and web access and also added a random factor to the frequency of web access so we don’t have everyone trying to download at the same time. I’ll leave it there for the moment I think, see what everyone thinks.

Great Fuzzy … Thanks for your hard work

[smallcat]

gg53 wrote:

My preference is that all functions be independent, for user chice which one to implement …

This is nice G … but we must make sure that in each Function, there is a  “rule” so they are not opposing each other all time.  Lets say Function A moves the SL to level X , then Function B (based on its logic) moves the SL to level Y. After some seconds, Function A moves it again to level X … a endless dynamic moving that can cause our MT4 freeze …

[ edit: image is double posted, it is deleted … ]

[smallcat]

smallcat wrote:

Nice information G . @simplex : Thanks for your new toy clear Channel …

Adding adaptive MA & clear Signal to the Channel on M15.  Higher TF is set to M30 in example.  Promising of a good result (not forward testing yet)  …

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[smallcat]

simplex wrote:

…  Clever use of complex data types can reduce this workload to ‘almost’ zero. In general: the fewer global variables, the better. s.

Hi Simplex,

Could you please give reason of using limited global variables ? As we know it is a good choice to call some result from other file (it is better, compared to using database just to access some small data) … Is it because of security reason ?

Thanks

[smallcat]

MTH2014 wrote:

EUR/USD still try to reach ‘her’ previous low area at 1.05500…

Thanks for this great information bro … i got almost same result here : http://penguintraders.com/forums/topic/mth-star-skull-and-smiley-indicator-lite-version/page/5/#post-10414

[edit: image deleted. posted at wrong thread … sorry …]

 

 

[smallcat]

gg53 wrote:

By watching the USDx indicator, you are looking on just one side of the coin. If one other currency (x) is much stronger compared to a rising USD – that will be the result. In those cases I still DON’T trade against a rising USD, and search for a weaker currency, pointing down, to trade against currency (x). This way your trade will be safer, less risky, and yield more pips. There is no point in trading two strong currencies against one another. G.

Nice information G .  @simplex : Thanks for your new toy clear Channel  …

[smallcat]

gg53 wrote:

Here are my USDx with and without (Plain) market share. Note that USDx weighted indicator is currently pointing up (correct) while the other one is pointing slightly down (current Friday close). I use the weighted one for my ForexGT_Spaghetti CS indicators. Just replace the std. USDx in your CIX calculations with this one (or similiar method) and you are on the right way. G.

Thanks a lot G. 

@simplex : Thanks for your zip file 

@fuzzy : Thanks for NewsCal code 

[smallcat]

@simplex,

Asymmetic ATR channel is interesting … any information how to learn more about it ?

Thanks in advance ..

[Author]

Posts