Index futures automation

[lucysparabola]

all I can say is lol.

 

[lucysparabola]

This is like the same stupid argument some of you made when someone posted CME is going to increase fees next year. You're like yea it's a tick or two..who cares.
I'm like who the hell are these people, are they real traders???

in fairness I was also in the camp of generally "who gives a F" but it was more from the standpoint of being gracious that we have these jobs.

 

[Overnight]

This is like the same stupid argument some of you made when someone posted CME is going to increase fees next year. You're like yea it's a tick or two..who cares.
I'm like who the hell are these people, are they real traders???

It wasn't I. The point I am making is you are doing very well in your account using your autosystem, and I am saying that if your system is sound, which seems to be the case, these tiny slippages should not hurt you much, considering how much your account size has grown.

 

[hilmy83]

Dude I only made like $3500 since launching the algo in September without major errors. I messed up in November cause I was tinkering with overnight hours and also playing around with micro dax and gold.

December is when i decided to drop overnight hours altogether and focus on just US session markets.

Month ended negative. Testing overnight hours contributed to most of this downfall. I think after 450 trades in shows that it's a workable strategy, but it has some flaws.

Since December is a short month, I just want to spend going over these results and backtest few more scenarios. Mainly just narrowing down which markets I want to trade going forward and sessions.

I think ideally by January, I got all the tinkering done. As they say, back to the drawing board!
View attachment 300468

View attachment 300469
View attachment 300470

As far as the algo is concerned, I think it's at the final version that I'm happy with. I dont see anymore 'fixes' needed at this point. Just letting it run and see how it does next few months. This algo went through several iterations. Cost me just under $1300 wokring with mt5 devs from third world countries lol.

 

[hilmy83]

Found errors today that threw the EA off. In fact found other issues from recent change. end up with bigger loss that I should have on MYM

Need to go back to the bracket order version of the EA until this shit is fixed. Working with dev is giving me anxiety

 

[hilmy83]

The stupid thing about MT5 is that you wont encounter issues like this in demo environment. Only in live that i can see errors sometimes. WHich makes this process frustrating and costly to test

 

[Mr Subliminal]

I thought the dev eliminated all bracket orders. There shouldn't be any value for TP in that stop order.

Also very true what you say about the demo environment. Live testing is the final arbiter.

 

[hilmy83]

I thought the dev eliminated all bracket orders. There shouldn't be any value for TP in that stop order.

Also very true what you say about the demo environment. Live testing is the final arbiter.

Stupid question, rIght now I'm running the single EA and apply it to 5 different charts. If I renamed the EA into 5 different ones, and apply to each chart, does it make each EA independent and faster to execute?

 

[lucysparabola]

The stupid thing about MT5 is that you wont encounter issues like this in demo environment. Only in live that i can see errors sometimes. WHich makes this process frustrating and costly to test

lol yes. in the demo environment in MT5 when you buy it always buys the bid and selling always sells the ask. utterly ridiculous.

Stupid question, rIght now I'm running the single EA and apply it to 5 different charts. If I renamed the EA into 5 different ones, and apply to each chart, does it make each EA independent and faster to execute?

I believe you might get interference unless you designate them differently with - wait for this highly technical term - Magic numbers. check with your programmer, they'll know better than me but I'm fairly certain this is the case.

 

[Mr Subliminal]

Stupid question, rIght now I'm running the single EA and apply it to 5 different charts. If I renamed the EA into 5 different ones, and apply to each chart, does it make each EA independent and faster to execute?

Without knowing the answer as to whether it would be faster to execute or not, in your position I would stick with the single EA, as the status quo would cause the least headaches for your programmer.

You may post this question on the MQL5 Forum, and if they say that it would lead to significant improvement (which I highly doubt), you can then implement the changes.