The Hidden Pending EA

[milanese]

Hi Roger and all,

you find in post 1 the new much more functional Hiddenpending EA
26 jan.,2015
New version, now the EA does to work in a case of reinitializing (if ever possible avoid any reinitializing of the running EA) again better, as in case of DeleteOppositeAfterFill is seleted, the EA will recognize this.
The new HiddenPending EA has much more functionality as requested from Roger:
manageAllTradesInThisPair the EA will use the moving SL functions for all open trades in the pair you have the EA attached.
SLMinDistanceToPrice, SL, TP, StackingLevel and InitialDistance for the pendings can new be used with the ATR, all have seperat , selfexplaining inputs for this, so you can select this for all or only one, or more, of them, you can select for each one different ATR TimeFrame and Period and of course set an ATR multiplicator for each of them you like. The SLMinDistance and the StackLevel will be shown you in the user Display in pip values.
If something is not clear please ask you question here in the thread, as it could be usefull for others too.

Hope you will find the new functions usefull!

Cheers

Tommaso

[Over60]

Hi followers,

The main problem with the ATR-feature, there is either a visual or numerical control how and when it performs, therefore out of control.

Not very transparency and useful and it blow up the settings.

That’s not the way I like to intend to follow.

I still remain with version W.
Sorry Milanese, that confirms, why I´m in trouble and would prefer, to separate and incorporate a trailing-feature.

With kind regards
Over60

[milanese]

Hi followers,

The main problem with the ATR-feature, there is either a visual or numerical control how and when it performs, therefore out of control.

Not very transparency and useful and it blow up the settings.

That’s not the way I like to intend to follow.

I still remain with version W.
Sorry Milanese, that confirms, why I´m in trouble and would prefer, to separate and incorporate a trailing-feature.

With kind regards
Over60

It shows in the user display all needed info, naturally, you can stay with the old version, but the new has some fixes and setting the ATR of you are not touched..

Cheers

Tommaso

[Jollyroger]

Hi Tomasso :

That was quick work. I have installed the EA and am currently using it on about 7 pairs. It works great and I have encountered no problems. I have changed a couple of the OOB ATR sets to better conform to my trading style and am also running one OOB test on a pair using the Opposite order features. I have changed over the running "W" EA's to the "X" version with no appreciable problems.

It will probably take me a couple of weeks to adjust my settings by forward testing the stacking and other ATR features on the EA but once that is done I feel it will result in significant improvement in profit. The main thing I expect is improved exits by minimizing premature stop loss exits and maximizing my ability to stay in the trade longer. Tomasso, I believe your additions have made a great EA even better. Thanks!

Roger

[milanese]

Hi followers,

The main problem with the ATR-feature, there is either a visual or numerical control how and when it performs, therefore out of control.

Not very transparency and useful and it blow up the settings.

That’s not the way I like to intend to follow.

I still remain with version W.
Sorry Milanese, that confirms, why I´m in trouble and would prefer, to separate and incorporate a trailing-feature.

With kind regards
Over60

I attached too, in the first post the light version has samme functions, but no ATR functions.., as some had this requested.

@Over60 the EA has since some time a trail function see previous posts, that works exellent, but as Roger said, it works even better if the trailing-steps where ATR calculated, maybe you should just experminet with ATR version as it will trail much more dynamic to the price movements as the "normal" version, and can too the staccking distance dynamic with the price movement calculate..

Cheers

Tommaso

[putusernamehere]

Hi tommaso :hi:


thanks fot this great EA and the new funktions
it look very good

cheers gunter

Hi Roger and all,

you find in post 1 the new much more functional Hiddenpending EA
26 jan.,2015
New version, now the EA does to work in a case of reinitializing (if ever possible avoid any reinitializing of the running EA) again better, as in case of DeleteOppositeAfterFill is seleted, the EA will recognize this.
The new HiddenPending EA has much more functionality as requested from Roger:
manageAllTradesInThisPair the EA will use the moving SL functions for all open trades in the pair you have the EA attached.
SLMinDistanceToPrice, SL, TP, StackingLevel and InitialDistance for the pendings can new be used with the ATR, all have seperat , selfexplaining inputs for this, so you can select this for all or only one, or more, of them, you can select for each one different ATR TimeFrame and Period and of course set an ATR multiplicator for each of them you like. The SLMinDistance and the StackLevel will be shown you in the user Display in pip values.
If something is not clear please ask you question here in the thread, as it could be usefull for others too.

Hope you will find the new functions usefull!

Cheers

Tommaso

[Over60]

Hi Milanese,

I did already taken into account, that trailing already was incorporated in previous versions.
I was only confused, because I did expect by misunderstanding that if price did cross BE (in sense of a profit execution level), that partial profit has to be executed, independent from SL-trailing. This PC-functionality depending on the SL, was unusual from my point of view, because by scalping with high lotsize, I´d like to take partial profit immediately at BE or any designated profit level. With other words, before PC will actually execute, the price has to move a certain distance into profit by the defined SL- + BE-distance before.
That make no sense to me, because depending from the settings, the price has to move before a certain distance in profit.

It might be a point of discussion, but I would prefer to separate PC from trailing.
After PC and crossing BE, no question, trailing should work independently open end after PC.

I prefer to set “pending distance to price” manually, instead of using the ATR-setting concerning entry-levels for stacking, especially in the faster timeframes and for scalping, because during high volatility-periods, if the volatility accelerates within short time, it will influence and change the ATR-distances for the pendings.

Actually, in ranging periods even with high vola, the fills with ATR might become very rare.

BTW: I did notice, that partial profit has been executed by trailing-SL, after than the price did retrace and than price moves further in the designated direction (version W). By crossing the BE-level once again, the remaining position has been closed by the trailing-SL.
With other words, PC did execute once again at BE.
I do not know, if that was considered, because trailing = true should work in profit with the remaining position after first PC at BE open end.

Moving on … and testing

With kind regards

Over62 (no error my friends)

[milanese]

Hi Milanese,

....

BTW: I did notice, that partial profit has been executed by trailing-SL, after than the price did retrace and than price moves further in the designated direction (version W). By crossing the BE-level once again, the remaining position has been closed by the trailing-SL.
With other words, PC did execute once again at BE.
I do not know, if that was considered, because trailing = true should work in profit with the remaining position after first PC at BE open end.

Moving on … and testing

With kind regards

Over62 (no error my friends)

Trainling works with open end, it is clear that if price retraces to the BE value the position will be completly closed, this is the propose of BE.
A part close will only be if the BE is set and you selected this function..every next moving SL step in win will not cause any part-close.
How you set the parameters for the Moving SL part is explained in that post http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3 ... 79#p105179
and that one
http://www.stevehopwoodforex.com/phpBB3 ... 73#p105373

If have still the feeling you do not understand the settings right..

Cheers

Tommaso

[milanese]

@Over60, about the partclose without setting BE, this would be a kind of first part TP, it is a function that is very specific imo and I am not sure if other users users will find a use for this.
So it would be great to hear other user- opinnions about this.

Cheers

Tommaso

[Over60]

Hi Milanese,

Thanks for your reply and comments.

Btw, I do not have troubles with the EA-settings, more how to apply and incorporate my strategies.

It should be common known, in reference to discrete and basic trading, that the first step will protect by SL an order at BE. That is the classic version refer to the stock market.

I´m a shorttime- and daytrader, so my point of view will sometimes not match with swing- and longterm-traders strategies considering movements in the range of hundred pips longterm.

For intraday-scalping under considering normal market conditions and depending from the trading hours, we have to consider hourly-volatility-ranges by average between 10 and 50 pips at the maximum.

http://www.forex-tribe.com/Forex-Volatility.php

By using the SL-trailing-feature (for example SL = 35 pips and BE = 5 pips), in conjunction with partial close at BE, the price has to move 35 (SL) + 5 (BE) = 40 pips > entry into profit before executing PC.
For scalping facilities with high lotsize and the levels, that is a very large distance, if I consider hourly retracements by 25 Pips in average. Please note additionally: With partial profit applied and executed, we can increase the SL-range concerning a Zero-sum result in the worst case.

That’s the reason I asked for PC, in the sense of profit-levels, which will work independent from the BE- and trailing functionalities.

Surely, I can switch off functionalities or I can increase (BE) or reduce (SL) the distances, but by moving e.g. the TP closer to entry, trailing open end with the remaining positions will stop-out running positions, as long as I have no possibility to define TP-levels for partial close without influence of trailing.

Please note in addition, that intraday I like to close a position partly or completely already between 5/10 and 10/20 pips in profit. It is a matter of lotsize, volatility and calculation.

It might be a solution to separate the partial close feature from trailing-dependency by true/false.
One up to three TP-levels should be sufficient also with respect to the stacking-function.

By stacking orders, PC/TP-levels might be an improvement, but I can imagine, that coding such features might be a challenge.

In the MPTM_global thread, I read similar problems.

Will stay tuned to hear other user’s opinion about that subject.

With kind regards
Over60

PS:
The issue concerning TP/PC in conjunction with trailing-feature is a very huge theme, especially by trading and considering multiple orders.
I don´t need to copy and repeat, what coders and traders did already introduce and report