Support Board
Date/Time: Mon, 03 Feb 2025 19:54:11 +0000
Post From: Spreadsheet
| [2019-08-02 06:28:48] |
| AndreyPoroshin - Posts: 105 |
|
The logic is such that when touching the level, the program must accurately understand the direction of entry, but no one can say for sure, and even more so the logic of the program. Therefore, it remains only to make it understand that by touching the level and passing it 0.25 lower, the sale is turned on, if the price turned around and went higher by 0.25, then the purchase should work and so on. Of course, this is the only right decision if you can minimize the difference between buying and selling, because it is in any case faster than it can be done manually. What you offer = AND (E3> = V3 + 0.25) = AND (E3 <= V3-0.25), creates many entry points, the sensitivity is large, and a lot is lost on slippage. I would like to give such a command to automation 1. It doesn’t matter on which side the impulse is going, but if the bar just approached the level or touched the level and 0.25 below the level, then the sell entry is turned on, but on the contrary, then buy entry accordingly. This is probably difficult for automation and there will be contradictions as when using = AND (CROSSOVER (E3: E4, V3)), i.e. on the same bar there will be both sell and buy. These are all seemingly elementary things, but it turns out that in any strategy this is the most important place where problems begin. With the wrong approach, a lot is lost in this place It is very important that Signal only ON bar close is NO to reduce reversal loss The attached video shows the problem of this strategy when the buy entry does not turn on after a reversal, although it is necessary I am sending you a sample strategy to understand the situation. Timeframe 60min NQ or any other instrument Date Time Of Last Edit: 2019-08-02 06:41:12
|
 BIG VOLUME.scss - Attached On 2019-08-02 06:28:13 UTC - Size: 2.89 MB - 349 views BIG VOLUME.Cht - Attached On 2019-08-02 06:28:22 UTC - Size: 321.08 KB - 384 views Private File |