Multi 10:4 Trader EA

[TraderDesk]

Andy, I was wondering if there was a way to tie in the "currencySlopeStrength" indicator to the EA. The reasoning behind this is to allow trades to be place using the strongest and weakest currencies.

Example: On the indicator I have place two levels, .70 and -.70. If a currency crosses greater those levels I want the EA to start placing trades based on 10.4 logic.
Example: On the indicator if a currency crosses another currency then look to start placing trades off of those two currencies based on 10.4 logic
Example: On indicator take the top two and bottom two(user defined) currencies and trade accordingly to 10.4 logic

I don't know how intricate it is to add that.

Just some ideas thrown into the mix here...

[MrLong]

Andy, I was wondering if there was a way to tie in the "currencySlopeStrength" indicator to the EA. The reasoning behind this is to allow trades to be place using the strongest and weakest currencies.

Example: On the indicator I have place two levels, .70 and -.70. If a currency crosses greater those levels I want the EA to start placing trades based on 10.4 logic.
Example: On the indicator if a currency crosses another currency then look to start placing trades off of those two currencies based on 10.4 logic
Example: On indicator take the top two and bottom two(user defined) currencies and trade accordingly to 10.4 logic

I don't know how intricate it is to add that.

Just some ideas thrown into the mix here...

Hi TD,

I'd like to keep it just the way Bob set rules, otherwise we will end up with an EA that's not 10.4.

Thanks for your feedback.

Andy

[TraderDesk]

Andy, I was wondering if there was a way to tie in the "currencySlopeStrength" indicator to the EA. The reasoning behind this is to allow trades to be place using the strongest and weakest currencies.

Example: On the indicator I have place two levels, .70 and -.70. If a currency crosses greater those levels I want the EA to start placing trades based on 10.4 logic.
Example: On the indicator if a currency crosses another currency then look to start placing trades off of those two currencies based on 10.4 logic
Example: On indicator take the top two and bottom two(user defined) currencies and trade accordingly to 10.4 logic

I don't know how intricate it is to add that.

Just some ideas thrown into the mix here...

Hi TD,

I'd like to keep it just the way Bob set rules, otherwise we will end up with an EA that's not 10.4.

Thanks for your feedback.

Andy

My thoughts were not to change the 10.4 logic for trading. In your EA you can allow what currencies you want to trade(IgnorePair) so instead of myself manually adding and subtracting what currencies to trade I would use the "currencySlopeStrength" indicator to set which currencies to trade...

Can't wait for the 1.08...

[nubika]

1.07 already works much better than the previous version was. Eagerly waiting for 1.08 to come out.
We are getting there.

Frank

[McNish]

Hello Andy, Just curious here. Are you going to incorporate the moving of pendings as the price moves further away while the conditions are still met?

Regards,

[sponn]

According to manuall system it should be like

Conitions met at WP - set pending with SL on MA240 (risk 2%).
If the price is moving closer to MA240 and passing next midPivot (or WS, WR) lines EA should delete first pending and place two new pendings: first at midpivot (or WS, WR) line and secibd at WP line with new lot sizes (higher because now it should count midpivot as an entry risk)

[MrLong]

Hello Andy, Just curious here. Are you going to incorporate the moving of pendings as the price moves further away while the conditions are still met?

Regards,

Hi,

I'm looking at doing that soon, I just need to get it running without any bugs then we can move on to that.

Thanks
Andy

[McNish]

Sure I get it. Get the basic mould up and running in correct order, then gradually add bells and whistles. Great stuff Man. Thanks.

[glabbeek]

These numbers look good:

maOuterBufferPips = GetOuterBuff(CurrentPair, 2.00);// outer parameter ADR X 2
maBufferPips = GetOuterBuff(CurrentPair, 0.25);// Inner parameter ADR X 0.25
BufferPips = GetOuterBuff(CurrentPair, 0.05);// Buffer Pips ADR X 0.05

I'm just testing now.

You beat me to it, I've had a busier day than I'd expected. ADR makes a lot more sense to use than ATR, and I guess those values are as good as any for a starting point.

Maybe I'm cutting in a bit late, but why use ADR in stead of ATR? Normally there is not a big difference between the two, but when bars start showing gaps, the difference can be huge. Specially after a slow friday, on a monday the gap can be double de ADR value.

ATR is, imho, the safer way in the long run.

[MrLong]

These numbers look good:

maOuterBufferPips = GetOuterBuff(CurrentPair, 2.00);// outer parameter ADR X 2
maBufferPips = GetOuterBuff(CurrentPair, 0.25);// Inner parameter ADR X 0.25
BufferPips = GetOuterBuff(CurrentPair, 0.05);// Buffer Pips ADR X 0.05

I'm just testing now.

You beat me to it, I've had a busier day than I'd expected. ADR makes a lot more sense to use than ATR, and I guess those values are as good as any for a starting point.

Maybe I'm cutting in a bit late, but why use ADR in stead of ATR? Normally there is not a big difference between the two, but when bars start showing gaps, the difference can be huge. Specially after a slow friday, on a monday the gap can be double de ADR value.

ATR is, imho, the safer way in the long run.

Hi glabeek,

I'm calculating the average over the last 200 bars.
We can play are around with it to find out the best setting, X 2 looks good.

Thanks

Andy