deserteagle
Active member
- Messages
- 205
- Likes
- 1
Hi,
Would be interesting if the trade closes out at be, as it would be the first time in 10 weeks that a trade went to 35pips, but not 43pips.
M
Not today, +43 😀
Hi,
Would be interesting if the trade closes out at be, as it would be the first time in 10 weeks that a trade went to 35pips, but not 43pips.
M
WiseAmbitions - and others who backtest long term (??? !!!!!!)
If you've got data going back a bit ( 2007 or before) - and you're concerned about poor performance in previous years (the dreaded when will it happen again) - put 'Volumes' on your daily chart and keep clicking '-' to zoom out view - you should see that the increased 'volume' has enhanced the performance of FMT (ie since 2008 -2009). .
I'm walking with you to the 43TP 🙂
Not today, +43 😀
Not today, +43 😀
FMT for me today :
6:00 start, buy trade, hit TP +30 pips
6:15 start, buy trade, hit TP +30 pips
6:30 start, buy trade, hit TP +32 pips
6:45 start, buy trade, hit BE
total today +92 pips .. 🙂
total for the week so far +183 pips.
Trading with Alpari UK --- 35 pips, 20 BE, 40 SL (standard settings).
9 wins (1st, 2nd, 4th, 7th, 10th, 11th, 15th, 17th, 23rd)
2 Losses (8th, 14th)
3 B/E (9th, 16th, 22nd)
2 NT (3rd, 18th)
TOTAL= (+315pips)+(-80pips)=235 pips for the month so far --- WOW!!!
LadyForex - good to feel nervous in this game. Plenty of traders pull out with a profit, rather than hold for a full loss, hence I'm happy with 50% @ 10pips and 50% @ 28pips.
Ezmai - keep up the good work!!!
Chris
Yes, I noticed you were lucky. And the spike upon 09.30 news was dramatic i.e + about 60pips in 2 seconds!
My latest careful analysis of the last 100 trades (E&OE) gives the following gains:
1) at 40/40 - the original FMT settings, + 800
2) at 35/40+BE - the current FMT recommendation + 755
3) 43/65/BE - DesertEagle + 917
My 'problem' with the DesertEagle setting is that although the gain is better, you need to reduce your lot size by nearly 40% to get to the same % risk per trade for a given amount of capital.
EG $10,000, trading at 2% risk. @ 40pips SL. You can run 5.0 Lots And make 5*755 i.e $3775 if the past performance is repeated
At 65SL, to keep to 2% risk you could run 3.1 lots, and make 3.1*917 i.e. $2842 if the past is repeated.
Fair enough you could carry on running 5.0 lots but your maximum risk would then be 3.25% per trade. And you would make $4585 which is better than $3775.
But why not run 3.25% risk on FMT settings, open 8.1 lots, and make 755 pips on them, giving you $6115 which is better than $4585.....
And so we go on..... all the way to the craziest possible risk per trade when all of your money is tied up in the margin and the same problem would continue to apply, and would still give advantage to the 40SL strategy.
I like your results from your setting but I can't help but think this is its main disadvantage.
Brilliant.
Ezmai
Yes, I noticed you were lucky. And the spike upon 09.30 news was dramatic i.e + about 60pips in 2 seconds!
My latest careful analysis of the last 100 trades (E&OE) gives the following gains:
1) at 40/40 - the original FMT settings, + 800
2) at 35/40+BE - the current FMT recommendation + 755
3) 43/65/BE - DesertEagle + 917
My 'problem' with the DesertEagle setting is that although the gain is better, you need to reduce your lot size by nearly 40% to get to the same % risk per trade for a given amount of capital.
EG $10,000, trading at 2% risk. @ 40pips SL. You can run 5.0 Lots And make 5*755 i.e $3775 if the past performance is repeated
At 65SL, to keep to 2% risk you could run 3.1 lots, and make 3.1*917 i.e. $2842 if the past is repeated.
Fair enough you could carry on running 5.0 lots but your maximum risk would then be 3.25% per trade. And you would make $4585 which is better than $3775.
But why not run 3.25% risk on FMT settings, open 8.1 lots, and make 755 pips on them, giving you $6115 which is better than $4585.....
And so we go on..... all the way to the craziest possible risk per trade when all of your money is tied up in the margin and the same problem would continue to apply, and would still give advantage to the 40SL strategy.
I like your results from your setting but I can't help but think this is its main disadvantage.
So, I downloaded and installed 4.3. Mark said that it fixes some MM issues. What issue exactly does it fix?
This is one of the best and sensible posts that I have seen in a long time. What really matters is return compared to risk, not just the pips won.
You are wise indeed. Excellent reasoning :clap:
Thanks, now here is the output of various situations with M/M
But please note I have calculated this all manually, not via the EA strategy tester, because I was using my own observed prices for the last 6 months, and some differences are bound to arise.
If you rolled up capital accepting 2% risk per trade at various settings this is where you get to in 100 trades
a) Original FMT settings 40/40 800 pips +41.6%
b) Present FMT settings 35/40/BE 755 pips +44.0%
c) Eagle's settings 43/65/BE 917 pips + 32.2%
d) conservative settings 10/40 750 pips + 45.2%
You will notice there's not a direct relationship between pips and capital growth. 10/40 gave the fewest pips but the highest compounded growth due to less drawdown. (However 40 pips SL takes 4 days to recover when suffered). Desert Eagle's results are affected by the reduction in lot size in order to keep to 2% risk per trade, else they would have been better. Present FMT recommending settings gave fewer pips than the original, but slightly better capital growth due - I presume - to less drawdown.
40% in 6 months, including the Christmas period is excellent growth, I can't think of any managed funds from investment companies which come close, indeed those which achieve this in 3 or 5 years receive a lot of publicity!!!!
Future returns cannot of course be guaranteed, but I continue to feel comfortable with FMT.
This is one of the best and sensible posts that I have seen in a long time. What really matters is return compared to risk, not just the pips won.
You are wise indeed. Excellent reasoning![]()