Dewey McG » Thu May 28, 2015 2:57 am wrote:
It's right there on the spreadsheet--you can see what the loss is at X number of turns.

You are on the right track. Here is my plan:

Gareth is helping me on this because my computer is a lot slower. I am compiling back tests on several pairs and will put together a table to see how often across several pairs we get a higher number of turns. If we use a larger number of turns (15+) we might almost never get a los, but it can really hurt when you do. The fact is you will get losses eventually. However, what if the losses are so rare at 10-12 turns that the losses are still relatively small and the overall profitability of the strategy remains robust. The goal is to find the sweet spot where we can keep risk to a minimum and still perform as well as we are seeing.

federicoo » Wed May 20, 2015 2:06 am wrote:
Dewel, I were thinking about a hedge strategy with ALR. This is sending a buy and sell position at the same time, RR 1:1. One of these will get the TP and the other one will be recovered by ALR. This way we will get a winner all time we send the hedge...

jib » Thu May 28, 2015 1:41 pm wrote:

federicoo » Wed May 20, 2015 2:06 am wrote:
Dewel, I were thinking about a hedge strategy with ALR. This is sending a buy and sell position at the same time, RR 1:1. One of these will get the TP and the other one will be recovered by ALR. This way we will get a winner all time we send the hedge...

Hi guys. I am a newbie. I really agree with Fedricoo, If there's a strategy that open buy and sell trade at the same time at the the monthly open price, when either of them hits tp, the other goes to ALR mode. It would really be nice. I really appreciate a good job being done by all the programmers, I wish I'm one myself.
Thanks guys

federicoo » Thu May 28, 2015 12:48 pm wrote:
Having a robust ALR system, If we could get the HEDGE PLUS ALR SYSTEM, we have not to worry about a directional bias of trade. On other hand, we could have a precise profit expectation over time periods, because we know that every time we open a hedge, we will have a winner with calculated profit and the other trade will be manage by the alr , finishing with the small profit at close of the cycle.

Dewey McG » Thu May 28, 2015 4:57 pm wrote:

federicoo » Thu May 28, 2015 12:48 pm wrote:
Having a robust ALR system, If we could get the HEDGE PLUS ALR SYSTEM, we have not to worry about a directional bias of trade. On other hand, we could have a precise profit expectation over time periods, because we know that every time we open a hedge, we will have a winner with calculated profit and the other trade will be manage by the alr , finishing with the small profit at close of the cycle.

1. Something like this would have to have a smaller initial TP. If you had a standard 40/120, for instance, you could trigger 2 ALR's by going one direction 40+ pips then turning around before hitting TP. To be viable you would need 1:1 for the initial trade..

2. if you want to run with this idea and do some number crunching, go for it but please open a new thread since it is off topic for this one.

Dewey McG » Sun May 31, 2015 5:35 am wrote:Special thanks to Romsyan (Gareth) for helping me out with this. After doing a ton of tests it works out much better if you allow a larger number of turns but reduce your initial lot size to match your risk. We tested GU, EU, Gold, GJ, GN, AC going back 5 years.

40/120 seems to be the safest setting. EURUSD went to 17 turns once (16 losses in a row before hitting the win to close the basket in a profit. GU only went to 16 but did it twice. Most of the pairs would do 15 once within 5 years

I attached the GU test and a chart showing how much you would be in draw down for each turn on a 15k account using .1 lots for your initial trade. Be sure to adjust your initial trade based on your account size and risk appetite.

rapple » Sun May 31, 2015 9:13 pm wrote:
Hi Dewey

Would the strategy still be profitable if you used a turn # as your stop loss. Lets say we set 10 turns as the SL and therefore lost 6.21% each time it was hit. Would the gains make up for the losses?

Just a thought

Kind regards Richard

Dewey McG » Sat May 30, 2015 7:35 pm wrote:Special thanks to Romsyan (Gareth) for helping me out with this. After doing a ton of tests it works out much better if you allow a larger number of turns but reduce your initial lot size to match your risk. We tested GU, EU, Gold, GJ, GN, AC going back 5 years.

40/120 seems to be the safest setting. EURUSD went to 17 turns once (16 losses in a row before hitting the win to close the basket in a profit. GU only went to 16 but did it twice. Most of the pairs would do 15 once within 5 years

I attached the GU test and a chart showing how much you would be in draw down for each turn on a 15k account using .1 lots for your initial trade. Be sure to adjust your initial trade based on your account size and risk appetite.

ForexFox » Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:37 am wrote:
There's one question about GU report.
As you can see the total loss of 15 trades is 4208.23, then get the largest win trade 4330.44 to recover the loss.
There's 122.21 profit in this basket.
Because I assume you still use 0.1% as break even profit.
Then we can get 122,210 as our basic balance.
Maybe the reason is commission and spread?
Could you confirm this for me?
Thanks for your research.

Edit. I already know the fast TP means in other thread.

Regards.