TDesk, Super Slope TD and XY42

Post by **SteveHopwood** » Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:59 pm

I have some instructive charts to show you.

Many of us found ourselves on the wrong side of SPB trades taken in July. Several of these pairs went into a level of DD that would have been horrible to close. Three of my pairs have recovered in the last 6 trading days.

CHFJPY closed today:

The valuye of patience.png

Only a tiny profit, but it is a profit and not a stonking loss.

Then from last week:

AUDCHFH4.png

That one netted over $100. Thingy is, if you look over those two charts with Peaky in mind (http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3 ... 46#p161246 for the noobs) SPB was clearly trading against a higher time frame Peaky and suffering.

I added Peaky to the next chart - also a +$100 basket closure - and we can see this clearly:

EURNZDH4.png

Trades were taken in the teeth of the gale of HTF movement and suffered accordingly. I reckon that Peaky needs adding into the mix here, and that fans of SPB need to think about this.

Post by **rozmer** » Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:56 am

From past experience , PEAKY is a vital ingredient for success.
Regards
Rozmer

Post by **SteveHopwood** » Sat Nov 17, 2018 5:27 pm

There are updated versions of the EA's in post 1, in response to this PM from Tim:

frog wrote:Hi Steve,
I am a us resident and use Oanda for my broker. I would like to use xy42 to help manage my trades and would also like to be able to have multiple trades on the same pair if warranted, but, fifo prevents this. There is one work around that consists of being able to close orders in any order as long as they are of differing lot sizes.
With that in mind I am requesting that you add options to basically use martingale on the xy42 ea's, because if for instance the ea opens up an .01 lot trade then a .02 lot trade and so on...the fifo rules with Oanda will let the trades be closed in ANY order. If all trades are of the same lot size then only the first trade may be closed first and so on. So it would be of great help to all us residents if the ea's had the options to do this. I am willing to pay and any willing person is welcome to have access. Using the ea's as are now leads to being unable to close all trades on a basket tp, fifo hangs this up and causes the system to not function properly.

Thank you,

Tim

frog

I have updated the user guide but the inputs should be obvious. From the updated guide:

UseIncrementalLotSizing: turns this feature on/off.
StartingLotSize: the lot size for the first trade.
LotIncrement: the trade size to add to subsequent trades.

I have some wonderful results to post. Peaky has helped a lot, especially on the H4, so I have added him to post 1.

Post by **SteveHopwood** » Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:54 am

Brilliant week last week:

USDCADM30.png

That was basket trading with a basket TP of $25 per 0.01 lot size and some manual closing late on Friday.

I am finding it best not to fight the H4 Peaky.

November so far:

Nov so far.png

Post by **tomele** » Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:59 pm

SteveHopwood wrote:I am finding it best not to fight the H4 Peaky.

Should I probably add some code to TDesk for indicators that must agree before a signal is valid?

Post by **SteveHopwood** » Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:11 pm

tomele » Mon Nov 19, 2018 2:59 pm wrote:
SteveHopwood wrote:I am finding it best not to fight the H4 Peaky.
Should I probably add some code to TDesk for indicators that must agree before a signal is valid?

What TDesk is already doing is fantastic thanks, so no need.

Post by **SteveHopwood** » Mon Dec 03, 2018 6:29 pm

I had no results to post over the weekend. I only took two trade signals last week and neither of them went anywhere and were still open at market close time. They moved into profit today but have yet to close.

All other TDesk signals last week would have clashed with the H4 Peaky. It occurred to me belatedly to wonder how much difference not taking the trades would have made. I only have two charts so the evidence is far from conclusive, but here they are:

AUDCHF. The red vertical line is where I was looking for a short trade. Boy, but wouldn't that have been a bundle of laughs.

AUDCHFH1.png

USDCAD. The green vertical line is where I was looking for a long trade:

USDCADH1.png

D1 SS is still positive so the buy could well have recovered, eventually. Even so, I am quite glad not to have taken that on in the face of all those Peaky shorts.

I am going to continue this exercise as more signals are generated that would be fighting Peaky; this could be interesting.

Post by **tomele** » Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:30 pm

SteveHopwood » 03 Dec 2018, 19:29 wrote:I had no results to post over the weekend. I only took two trade signals last week and neither of them went anywhere and were still open at market close time. They moved into profit today but have yet to close.

All other TDesk signals last week would have clashed with the H4 Peaky. It occurred to me belatedly to wonder how much difference not taking the trades would have made. I only have two charts so the evidence is far from conclusive, but here they are:

AUDCHF. The red vertical line is where I was looking for a short trade. Boy, but wouldn't that have been a bundle of laughs.

USDCAD. The green vertical line is where I was looking for a long trade:

D1 SS is still positive so the buy could well have recovered, eventually. Even so, I am quite glad not to have taken that on in the face of all those Peaky shorts.

I am going to continue this exercise as more signals are generated that would be fighting Peaky; this could be interesting.

That is a very strong argument to implement "Must Obey" signals in TDesk, isn't it?

Cheers
Thomas

Post by **SteveHopwood** » Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:40 pm

tomele » Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:30 pm wrote:
SteveHopwood » 03 Dec 2018, 19:29 wrote:I had no results to post over the weekend. I only took two trade signals last week and neither of them went anywhere and were still open at market close time. They moved into profit today but have yet to close.

All other TDesk signals last week would have clashed with the H4 Peaky. It occurred to me belatedly to wonder how much difference not taking the trades would have made. I only have two charts so the evidence is far from conclusive, but here they are:

AUDCHF. The red vertical line is where I was looking for a short trade. Boy, but wouldn't that have been a bundle of laughs.

USDCAD. The green vertical line is where I was looking for a long trade:

D1 SS is still positive so the buy could well have recovered, eventually. Even so, I am quite glad not to have taken that on in the face of all those Peaky shorts.

I am going to continue this exercise as more signals are generated that would be fighting Peaky; this could be interesting.

That is a very strong argument to implement "Must Obey" signals in TDesk, isn't it?

Cheers
Thomas

Truth to tell Thomas, I do not understand.Surely all I need to do is add Peaky to a chart if I want TDesk itself to take not of him?

Post by **tomele** » Mon Dec 03, 2018 7:51 pm

Hi Steve.

My thought is this: If you add Peaky to a set of 4 other indicators and set the entry threshold to 80 or below, the other indicators can "outvote" Peaky if they all agree, but Peaky disagrees.

I am thinking of a concept where the threshold must be reached by the "normal" signals and additionally one (or more) signals are mandatory to agree. So even if all the "normal" signals like HGI, SS, etc. agree, but (for example) Peaky disagrees, the signal would still not be valid.

Cheers
Thomas