Why aren't more people talking about Robopip's Inside Bar strategy?

I have been following Robopip’s blog updates on his Inside Bar Momentum Strategy for about two months now, and I’ve just finished going through every single entry he wrote since the inception of the strategy. For those who don’t know what I am talking about, click this link (although he now uses a 40% stoploss (EDIT: size in pips relative to the entry setup, not position sizing), not 20% as mentioned in the article).

The strategy looks solid and straight up profitable. This is assuming he is not somehow faking the results, but since there is no discretion in the rules and since he shows every valid signal for the week, I don’t really see how that could realistically be faked. Despite that, I see no one trying it out, backtesting it or forward testing it here on the forum. Why is that? Do you guys see something I am not seeing, or perhaps you just didn’t know about it?

Since we all have a bunch more time on our hands, I wanted to write this thread for two reasons. First of all, I would like to gather your opinion on the strategy itself. And then I want to try to forward test it here, sharing the weekly results in this thread (hopefully I’ll keep up).

An important note: Robopip doesn’t use New York Close. His 4h candles close at 4 AM in GMT+8. I will be using this data feed to take trades to make sure I am as close as possible to him.

1 Like

40% stop loss?!?! Please only demo this.

What’s wrong with a 40% stop loss?

It all depends on how you size your position.

One could easily have a 100% stop loss if their position size is $10 and their capital is say $10,000. The max risk would be a tiny 10 basis points.

For this system though, Robopip places its stop loss at the first candle’s high minus 40% of its range (for long trades).

There was no “40% stop loss” ever mentioned. :slight_smile:

The stop loss percentage refers to the size in pips relative to the mother candle’s range. We are not talking about position sizing. He risks 2% per trade as far as I know.

1 Like

Based on Robopip’s recent post, it/he/she/? mentions 1% risk per position but it’s really up to the trader on position sizing.

But you’re right, Robopip doesn’t get much love.

Lol. So I would risk 40k on each trade on a 100k account. Cool, if it works with you then keep at it. Best of luck.

Thanks for clearing that up. I just went with the original poster’s information. I didnt check the strategy.

You’re confusing stop loss placement and position sizing.

I’m just going with what was written “he uses a 40% stop loss”. If I say I use a 5% stop loss I take it as im risking 5% per trade. How do you read it?

Like I already mentioned, even if you did read it that way, a 40% stop loss isn’t necessarily bad or good. You’d need more information about the system to determine this.

It just seems that when you saw “40% stop loss”, you were quick to make a judgment and dismiss the system outright. (All without having checked out the system yourself.)

From how I interpret the first post, the OP isn’t asking for random comments but informed opinions from folks who may have had prior experience trading the system, or at the very least, are familiar with the system.

Like I said if 40% risk per trade works for you then carry on. But from experience it hasnt worked for me so I advised to use the system on a demo first.

I didnt dismiss the strategy I dismissed the risk management and advised try on demo first. He has edited the original post now anyway to clarify. So it’s not 40% stop loss.

What doesn’t work for you doesn’t necessarily mean it won’t work for somebody else.

The reason it sounded like you dismissed it is because you said:

Please only demo this.

The keyword there is “only” which implies to never trade it live.

You didn’t say “Please demo this first.”

But now that you’ve clarified that, then it’s all good.


I didn’t have alot of time this morning, so I ran it on H4 candles for 2019 on 10 major pairs.

They all came out positive over the year. *EDIT: I found a small bug, and now the result is breaking even for the year.

You get a lot of trades cancelled, as the pattern occurs quite often - but this seems actually to benefit the system a lot, as it cancels a lot of false signals in the process.

As a disclaimer, I ran the test using the H4 candles rather than the tick price (to get a quick result).

To make it a ‘worst case’ scenario, I took the live price as the candle low follwed by candle high when walking through the candles (the reverse for short trades)

Anyhow, it seems to be something that is a good basis to work on.

Thank you for testing this. I was hoping the results would be better, but it’s nice to know. Did you use the data feed I mentioned? The one where candles close at 04:00 AM in GMT+8? It shifts one hour compared to New York close, and that significantly changes where signals occur.

tradeforex077 obviously misunderstood the 40% risk. However, his advice is good! I would dismiss any system that advocates a 40% risk, out of hand.

If you want to stay in the game you certainly don’t want to risk anywhere near 40% on a trade. It does not work for him and I can guarantee you that it will not work for any of us. Just do the math - 2 consecutive losing trades and you’re almost wiped out. Try coming back from such losses and you will realize that it is an exercise in utter frustration. Trade safely with prudent capital management.

Ah, no, I just let it run the year over all 4H candles.

I’m really busy with work this week, in a few days I can adjust and post the results here if you like?

I would surely appreciate it! I am teaching myself Pinescript, but I am not still confident with building an automatic backtest. Else I would do ir myself.

I trade something like this on the daily timeframe.

Backtesting and research takes work. It’s the least glamorous part of trading since there’s no immediate payoff, so many newbies avoid it. But also, when it comes to profitable technical strategies, alot of people like to keep it to themselves because these strategies are very valuable.

I assume you’re not suggesting a lack of effort on my part (that would make your message quite condescending and unpleasant), since I do extensive backtest of my strategies. I do it manually, which is inefficient, hence why I am learning to code.

It wasn’t directed at you, sorry. I was talking about why people don’t normally talk about their own backtesting results.