#1 – Ok.

#2 – % of balance method is debatable… Consider losing 50% of your account, recovery will take ages because of smaller lots.

#3 – Ok.

#4 – Initial Stop by %ATR is Ok, adapting SL should reduce initial risk and not based on ATR. Maybe variation on PSAR or dynamic reduction of ATR factor.

#5 – BE should be based on risk factor (…[Read more]

#1 – Ok.

#2 – % of balance method is debatable… Consider losing 50% of your account, recovery will take ages because of smaller lots.

#3 – Ok.

#4 – Initial Stop by %ATR is Ok, adapting SL should reduce initial risk and not based on ATR. Maybe variation on PSAR or dynamic reduction of ATR factor.

#5 – BE should be based on risk factor (…[Read more]

#1 – Ok.

#2 – % of balance method is debatable… Consider losing 50% of your account, recovery will take ages because of smaller lots.

#3 – Ok.

#4 – Initial Stop by %ATR is Ok, adapting SL should reduce initial risk and not based on ATR. Maybe variation on PSAR or constant reduction of ATR factor.

#5 – BE should be based on risk factor…[Read more]

I see what you mean.

The “bug” in the logic is that your Entry logic is using different measurements for “Trend” and “Range” than the PT.

My trading style is built around “fixed” way of determinig “Trending” or “Ranging” market condition. It is always the same and depends on the entry TF (check 2 higher TF’s and 1 lower TF).

If you call this…[Read more]

Entry point decision was based on known data at that time. Why should I “synchronize” my trading on history instead of what is going on right now?

Doing so is like “let’s synchronize our watches to the time 4 hours ago”…

G.

“Open” and “Close” are terms borrowed from the Stock & Commodities markets, where there is a true “Open” of the day and true “Close” of the trading day.

In Forex there is no such thing, prices are in continues flow. Semi-true “Open” & “Close” only happen in Friday close and monday open – excluding interbank quotes during that time.

Since…[Read more]

Entry and my idea of trade management are two separate issues in my trading.

Entry is decided based upon current known market data. Now you decide to enter.

As time goes by, market is developing and changing – and at this point the “perfect trade manager” should adapt to changes – even if the trade is going “your way” or against it.

Leaving…[Read more]

Entry and my idea of trade management are two separate issues in my trading.

Entry is decided based upon current known market data. Now you decide to enter.

As time goes by, market is developing and changing – and at this point the “perfect trade manager” should adapt to changes – even if the trade is going “your way” or against it.

G.

Maybe a simple example will steer this discussion away from “random entries” strategy, and more to the point (just one example of “adaptive trade management”:

When you should exit a trade even before StopLoss is hit?

G.

Yes, but it’s an old one… I have an improved ones since than.

But we are in a “fair” or “true” price vs. current graph price discussion.

G.

Please re-read my posts.

I’m not talking about “random entries” system. I’m talking about dynamic, adaptive trade management that makes logical decisions on current active trade.

G.

Let me be clear on the subject:

I’m talking about an adaptive “trade management” and not a static system that trade random entries.

“trade management” is NOT just setting a lot size and SL+TP. It’s dynamic management as the trade develops – either toward SL or toward profit.

Meaning moving and adjusting SL, dynamic trailing, adding to a…[Read more]

Wrong on first sentence.

I didn’t suggest “an extreme goal in his 1st post: profitability at random entry”.

I suggest a “perfect trader” that will trade even a “bad entry” to a MINIMAL, logical loss – after managing the trade the best way an experienced human can.

G.

Every position that I take have an alternative StopLoss in the form of hedging.

Invest in a method of getting out of an hedging position with minimal profit or BE. It works for me.

When price hits SL – It’s a definite LOSS.

When you are hedging – your money is still in the “game” and you can recover with at least BE.

G.

There is another way:

Instead of StopLoss – use hedging.

That’s what I’m using – but it’s not a simple method and quite difficult and requires experience to get out of such hedging.

As to pi & its skew – related to lot SIZE and trade scaling – that’s what I mentioned in the first post (scaling position size). A feature that is ignored by most…[Read more]

Take this statement, although true, with a grain of salt…

Professional money managers and hedge fund managers are bound to some stupid indexes – in order to measure their “risk level”.

So if they outperform their relative index – they will lose customers because the relevant rating agencies will mark them as “high risk”…

Stupid, but…[Read more]

Don’t “listen” to me… listen to this (math professor):

http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Random-Entry-System-matches-CTA-4394344.S.223752470?qid=7f9b89df-f262-4dff-b93d-058bed187560&trk=group_most_recent_rich-0-b-ttl&goback=.gmr_4394344

G.

Points #1 & #2 are not needed for this project.

The idea is to take the process of trading AFTER we got some Entry signal, and to manage that trade from that point, adapt to changing market condition and currency pair characteristics.

Imagine that someone gave an order, signal, or already entered a trade – and left the room, leaving you to…[Read more]

Points #1 & #2 are not needed for this project.

The idea is to take the process of trading AFTER we got some Entry signal, and to manage that trade from that point, adapt to changing market condition and currency pair characteristics.

G.

MPTM requires pips parameters, It doesn’t scale trades, lot sizes, etc.

I want the “Perfect Trader” to decide, based on the market and currency pair, on those values.

G.