Rinse 'n Repeat

[kwchau]

I've posted my testing results below. I am running RnR original and RnR EXP side by side to compare, both of them are OOTB setting except the lot size (but they are the same for both EAs).

My observation so far is that there is no clear winner between the two. The EXP version is more profitable but with a bigger DD. The Original version is less profitable but with less DD. This is different from my expectation because I expect the EXP has a lower DD due to its unique way of closing large loss trades.

Next week, i'll increase MinPipProfitOnClosure from 20 to 50 for the EXP version, and also reduce the MinOpenTradesToStartOffset from 4 to 3 for the Original version, to see if there is bigger difference in performance.

[TraderJoeForex]

I have found TDMTL breakout qualifier rules quite robust in my trading. They eliminate a lot of false breakouts. A good summary of the rules are explained here: http://www.marketinout.com/stock-screen ... Qualifiers

This approach can be applied manually by turning RnR off while a hedge is placed and back on after the hedge has been closed on whatever timeframe you like to trade. The higher the timeframe used the higher the potential drawdown that RnR can accrew but obviously the less often a hedge is needed.

Adding what is essentially a breakout trading strategy to what is currently the most effective automated range trader I have ever seen could just be a worthwhile paring. ....

I had a bit of time today and wanted to add some further explanation on this looking at H4 candles so far for May.

I have marked on the chart the candle open where a hedge would be applied and taken off using TDMTL breakout qualifier rules. Blue vertical line would be a buy hedge and red a sell hedge placed at candle open. Black vertical line for the hedge closed on that candle open.

What I am proposing is that RnR would be allowed to trade only following a hedge close (black line) until the next hedge opened (blue or red line).

Using this example on GJ there would be a total of 324 pips saved in the last 2 weeks by implementing this strategy on H4. Now if we consider that often there may be an imbalance of 10 or more active trades with RnR i.e. 18 buy trades and 8 sell trades then using these numbers the 324 pips would become 3240 pips. Of course there is no consistency to the imbalance and so the position size that is hedged will change each time. These numbers are just for the sake of example.

There could be a problem if the average losing hedge was a much larger position than the average winning hedge and then implementing this strategy could cause big losses. However from trading this manually the past couple of days on M15 this does not seem to be the case but only time will tell.

One argument may be that if this breakout strategy was such a good idea then why not just trade that and forget about RnR. The point is that I am not suggesting that implementing the breakout strategy will be more profitable than just trading RnR. It may or may not be depending on market conditions - it is a completely different strategy but used together RnR and this breakout strategy would naturally hedge the risk between both.

A breakout strategy alone is dependent on some long runs in a trending market to make a lot of pips. These are the same conditions that will cause repeated leaky toilets with RnR and potentially wipe an account with repeated Stop Loss partial or full closes. As Bruster mentioned in the week there is a chance that we can bank enough pips between these bad runs to come out on top.. but trading a live account based on this chance is a huge risk.

Equally a breakout strategy will slowly destroy an account during a prolonged ranging market with lot of false breaks and small losses. In these conditions RnR excels and hopefully the profits will exceed the losses from the false breakouts.

Anyway I will leave this now with Bruster and Steve to consider whether this might have some legs as an optional hedging function and in the meantime I will keep testing and report back again in a couple of weeks.

(also just to note although the last but one candle open on Friday below would have signaled a hedge to close since there was a new 3 candle low confirmed I left this as I have done live because this was almost the end of the week. I would always leave a hedge in place so that I am hedged over the weekend. As another example the same idea can be applied on a lower timeframe like M15 for the last candle before any Major News to hedge that too).

[SteveHopwood]

Here are my live figures trading RnR on GJ only, from 25th April:

XAUUSDH4.png

That is an OK return for three weeks of trading. I have had several positions with move than 30 trades open in one direction - and a couple with over 60 trades in place with the majority in one direction. A decent move in the direction of the trades closes them out. I went to bed one night with c. 50 buys open and awoke the following morning to find those closed and some 50 or so sells open instead.

I posted recently about funding a tiny account for a much loved former victim with just above $380. Here are the results so far:

EURGBPH1.png

I started with RnR on GJ. The account reached $400 before GJ did a leaky toilet and partial stop losses took the balance back to around $300. I removed the GJ and put the bot onto UC instead - one of the quietest pairs. This has made up the losses and left the account in a small profit. I have since added another $433, so the balance is $830 at the mo - meaning the DD has to hit $166 before RnR starts closing losing trades.

Early days still, but it lends credence to my original idea that 0.01 lots per $2,000 of balance is feasible on psychotically lunatic GJ, whilst trading is possible with a smaller balance on the quieter pairs.

We shall see.

[Gertje]

Here are my live figures trading RnR on GJ only, from 25th April:


That is an OK return for three weeks of trading. I have had several positions with move than 30 trades open in one direction - and a couple with over 60 trades in place with the majority in one direction. A decent move in the direction of the trades closes them out. I went to bed one night with c. 50 buys open and awoke the following morning to find those closed and some 50 or so sells open instead.

I posted recently about funding a tiny account for a much loved former victim with just above $380. Here are the results so far:


I started with RnR on GJ. The account reached $400 before GJ did a leaky toilet and partial stop losses took the balance back to around $300. I removed the GJ and put the bot onto UC instead - one of the quietest pairs. This has made up the losses and left the account in a small profit. I have since added another $433, so the balance is $830 at the mo - meaning the DD has to hit $166 before RnR starts closing losing trades.

Early days still, but it lends credence to my original idea that 0.01 lots per $2,000 of balance is feasible on psychotically lunatic GJ, whilst trading is possible with a smaller balance on the quieter pairs.

We shall see.

I agree, GBPJPY might not be the right pair.
I kept EURAUD trading during last week, 0.01/2.000 and the results are awesome, 1% a day with max DD of 4.7%.
This is still the test with the old version, trading both on/ off the singlesideoffset.

Global Prime - Empty4 4.png

Results can be seen here; http://www.fxblue.com/users/2044051/sta ... 4#overview

I'm considering adding this setup to my live account.
.

[SteveHopwood]

I agree, GBPJPY might not be the right pair.

.

You agree with what in my post? Please do quote where I state that GJ is not the right pair to trade.

Which bit of my post did you not get? I did try to use as many single syllable words as possible, and tried to avoid using complex sentences. Maybe I failed? Sorry.

NEVER misquote me. You will not enjoy the result of doing so. Take me a tad more seriously in the future.

Capiche?

[kwchau]

After I manually close all trades of GBPUSD, the EA shows a message :

TRADING IS STOPPED, CHANGE INPUTS TO RESTART

I have change input, remove and reload the EA, restart Empty4, all fails to get rid of this message and RnR EXP is not taking trades.

Appreciate any help !

kwchau

Found the real reason of this problem, silly me

It is the StopTradingAtNextZeroUPL. When it is turned on, after reaching zero profit or manually close all orders, RnR EXP will stop trading with the above message. The EA will start trading again only when this option is manually turned off.

[Bruster400]

I've tested 4 settings:

1: OOTB - (recovery ON, singlesidedcomplexoffset ON)
2: OOTB but with singlesidedcomplexoffset OFF
3: OOTB but with recovery OFF
4: OOTB with recovery AND singlesidedcomplexoffset OFF

Update on the performance of this test:

Set 4 is running away in the lead and that's over a period where a clear downtrend was in place with a drop of over 200 pips. The results as of now are given below but 4 has higher closed profits and lower DD than any of the other methods. This suggests that on this test at least, the original simplicity of the first bot wins over the extra features of the recovery version. I'm going to run further testing on the min pip profit but unless anyone has any significantly different results, the recovery mode is going to stay "experimental"!

[SteveHopwood]

Anyone here not tried Rene's GridDancer/Master at http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3 ... f=5&t=4709 needs to head over. Early days, but it looks as though Rene has taken this game to a whole new level.

[kwchau]

My parallel testing results start to indicating that RnR original is better in controlling DD and more profitable than EXP when considering the net profit ie. profit minus DD.

Please see charts below. I will stop the test on RnR EXP to leave room for testing other EA's.

[TraderJoeForex]

Hedging RnR for today's breakout on GJ saved my skin...