Net breakdown (contracts traded):
ZS $4(4)
ZS $4(4)
| RESULTS FOR DAY | |
|---|---|
| Contracts: | 4 |
| Net $P/L: | 4 |
| Wins: | 1 |
| Losses: | 1 |
| Win%: | 50 |
| Avg$Win: | 139 |
| Avg$Loss: | -135 |
Sat in on a Forex fib webinar today and took a few screenshots. I thought I'd pass it on since it was free. Always good to see what "gurus" are teaching. I can't imagine these strats backtest very well but who am I to judge. Take it for what it's worth and/or what I paid for the info!
Posts
I don't believe in trailing stops either, because they're too stupid in illiquid contracts. If there were a way to peg them to a noise filtered theoretical value on these brokers, I think they might work better. However, what happens with my broker is that ticks actually end up on the tape outside of the national best bid and offer (delayed reporting? cheating? who knows) and trigger trailing stops and real stops.
ReplyDeleteBetter way to do it is to manually code up a strategy that calculates a real, but possibly unobservable price that doesn't get abused by data that's on the tape.
Every system I've tested shows reduced P/L with trailed stops vs. a fixed target. But they do (along with scaling out) have the advantage of smoother equity curves.
ReplyDeleteHow are you testing this stuff? Manually?
ReplyDeleteCombination of tons of Excel "if" statements looking at OHLC data, EFS studies in esignal, and manually by scrolling thru charts and recording data into Excel spreadsheet to build database of results for a given strat. Yeah, I know - I need to learn how to program!
ReplyDelete