But I do emphasize consistency over the large inconsistent profit targets, so the wins are capped as you say.
I like the issues that LF is bringing up. I have always wanted to ask you about the individual trades as well, and if you wouldn't mind sharing, something like this.
It was more so for my benefit because what I am amazed by is how you can always end green. I wanted to see what your trades look like when you hit a rough patch, and if you pull off bigger winners, or average down, etc. (my snapshot doesn't show quantity, since its always just one contract, but if you could have shared yours, that would be awesome, and provide great insight, not into your strategy per say in order to not create liquidity problems for you, but where the consistency comes from and the thought process behind the algo's consistency).
But I do emphasize consistency over the large inconsistent profit targets, so the wins are capped as you say.
I am nobody to give advice, but from what I read, some do say that you can either trade to make money or to feel good. Of course its amazing to know you have a system that is always green, but having a system that makes more money is even better! If trading manually, its even more important to be green because if in a drawdown, its probably difficult to put on the correct trades and hold. But an algo would have no trouble doing this. So it seems to me like an algo would be perfect for this.
What I imagine is that on some days, you could end up with $100 vs. +$30, but this would mean that some days you finish at $0 or -$20. But if there is a positive expectancy, then for sure it makes sense to do it like this.
But I also see the merits of taking a profit and not wondering about what could have been. Its just that an algo, without the emotional bias, is much better suited for doing the thing to maximize profits vs. what feels good, which is what a manual trader needs.
. So you can see why this would fail in ES lol.