With the divide zero i was using the older EA v6 i am on v8 and i was forward demo testing, no errors now when it has re-created trades, let me see what happens over the next 24 hours, if its a problem i’ll let you know
Oh no worries about the slippage, its not something i need just thought it might be something some others might want, dont worry about adding it just was trying to be helpful
Hi sorry for the confusion, i think i know what happened i have another EA and i think it is closing your EA’s pending orders, thats what it looks like, sorry for that confusion.
In two trades, EURUSD and EURJPY long, that I could see on the H4 chart, should not be taken long because they have both hit and failed to break above a resistance level 4 times. Too bad the EA can’t see this kind of thing. Suppose it could be a filter, but that is very subjective. Probably something you wouldn’t do if manual trading.
Maybe the resistance levels are more important to use if your trading this strategy on anything less than the daily chart as were not using them at the moment? Just a thought if you wanted to use your EA on a lower timeframe
I have seen EA’s have trouble with the yen pairs, maybe we should just avoid trading the ten pairs for now otherwise maybe the EA should use this change when only taking yen pairs? Maybe this explains the loss I has yesterday with usdjpy and maybe it would of been a winner with what you just pointed out?
SandyBeach, good to know the revision seems to have cleared up the error.
Regarding another EA closing the Wicks_ea trades: if that is what happened, it should have been able to differentiate between trades it makes and trades other EA’s make. If you would like, and have the original code file (.mq4), I can take a look and maybe tweek it so it doesn’t mess with other trades.
Some people making this stuff are newbys and think their trade is the only one on the chart, so they don’t code to eliminate “cross talk” so to speak.
I’m not sure whether its the EA or the Yen pairs, but with the usual 30-40 min fib size on major pairs that I use just doesnt work well on the other pairs.
The yen pairs and commodity pairs and any other pair that doesnt have a usual price, e.g 1.**** or 0.**** (1 decimal place pairs) suffer without a bigger minimum fib size. I have no idea whether thats a EA thing or just the pairs trade better with a bigger fib size
However what I have noticed with those sorts of pairs, is that despite risk calculation being on, if I have a bigger fib size, the losses are also huge (but obviously less often :P), which tends to make me believe its a calculation error
I’ve been manually testing this strategy for the past couple months and have noticed that when a trade triggers, it will go up by 10-20 pips and then reverse and hit the stop loss – or come close to it – before deciding to go up or down again.
(Not sure if this is happening to others as well but this seems to be the case with two of my accounts where I was testing this strategy.)
Overall, this is a conservative strategy that requires patience, tweaking and filtering. Be very selective about what trades you take to avoid getting on the wrong side of a trend or consolidation period.
I just thought of something, with this strategy (if we are trading manually) do we only place one pending order?
For example if the price breaks the 110 Fib line and opens a trade and normal and hits SL, then the price comes back up and hits the 100 Fib line again should we be opening a second trade for the day or should we only be having one trade per currency pair per day regardless ?
I wouldn’t recommend more than 1 pending order per day or trade (for your chosen currency pair) – irrespective of whether it goes into a profit or loss. While trading this system I’ve noticed that your SL can either being too small or too large. The former means a forced loss even though the trade itself might reverse later. And the problem with the latter is it skews the risk-reward ratio, not to mention money management rules.
To trade properly with this system, you need to consider the overall trend using Stochs, MA and other indicators and not just blindly follow the fib levels (no offense). While this will reduce the number of trades, it will also reduce the chances of false or doomed entries.
That’s why I said before that this is best seen as a conservative strategy that requires tweaking and patience.
a ‘wick size’ filter, many problems of the stop losses not being entered in the EA and some losing trades I believe is because of a previous candles small wick.
A bigger idea i’ve noticed while scouring the charts is maybe having entry at 131.8 and stop loss at 61.8. Many losing trades I’ve noticed only JUST hit the 110 to-115% fib levels, while quite a lot of trades that hit the 131.8 level continue much higher.
Just a thought, I’d like to see it tested if its easy to just replace entry/stop loss levels in the EA
Thanks for pointing this out, glad to have it confirmed, i was thinking this.
No offence taken Would you mind sharing your entry and exit rules so we can learn from you if you don’t mind?
I have no objection to trading conservatively, if we are making some pips, a few pips here and there is better than a big loss or drawdown !
If we used a wick filter like your suggesting so we only trade if the previous Wick is large enough, would we be using this instead of the current 30 pip rule?
if you can form a tabulated list of your composits thoughts, I can put it into the EA.
re: the wicksize of previous-previous candle, I think you still will need min_fibo_size
I will put a true/false “Allow_Multiple_Trades_Per_Day” in the inputs
I notice that the BE point kicks me out frequently and the price moves back into profit. I’m thinking of adding a fib% input for BreakEven so I can set it at 0% or even -10% from bottom fib point.
Will be back later, give me your thoughts.
“Use_Stoch_Filter” can be added if you want, but then we’ll also need Stoch input settings. No offence to NewNine, but Stochs/MACDs etc have never been good predictors of market direction in my experience. The thing can be in overbought for months, and the whole time you’re thinking, it’s got to turn around some day. No, it doesn’t. Trading pure price action, IMHO, is the only useful thing. On the other hand, I"m broke, so my experience may not be useful
PS
I added comments to pending/open trades so you will know right away if it is what you expected in risk/pip value. It will be on next version I post with your additions pre previous post.
StopLossPips =
PointCost =
Each pip will be:
Calculated lots:
This would be useful so we can find an optimal level to set.
Here is a thought, what if we had a volume indicator maybe this could help identify quiet periods. If so then if its quiet in the market then we use a higher Fib point, more movement then current Fib level ?
Or do we just use a higher Fib level period as pointed out by Mitchell ?
If Mitchell does not mind doing for us if you could add this into your next version of the EA then perhaps Mitchell can run a backtest on the EA at current settings and Fib at 131.8 and stop loss at 61.8.
Maybe this would help to improve entries? It would mean less profit, but perhaps less losses ?
I would say lets evalute the Stoch, if we find things dont work at present then maybe we shall look at it unless someone proves me wrong ?
With regards to adding anything extra to the EA i don’t think we need to add anything else, if add more indicators at present we will be detracting away from the original strategy. Lets only add more indicators only if we find something that does not work.
Lets also bare in mind that Mitchell pointed out right now is not a great time to trade this strategy, so i think the EA is doing what it is supposed to do its just the season is off.
If we start adding in oscillators, it would seem that we’re peeling away the simplicity that this method is supposed to be.
I know Mitchell wants to back test the different fib levels. I’m trying to figure out a way to set trailing stop loss instead of stepped stop loss with hopes that it will bring more returns. So far not really, hehe.
