Max Draw Down EA from Matrix Grid Thread
Page 1 of 733 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 323

Thread: Max Draw Down EA from Matrix Grid Thread

  1. #1
    This thread is just a thread that I am beginning to avoid hijacking the Matrix Grid thread nevertheless I expect this to be a rather inactive thread. This may be used for questions and explanations of the MaxDd ea. The initial version simply took a dimension of the dd and closed out all orders as it hit the maximum. This upgrade adds a few features.

    First, I noticed I was having trouble keeping track of that eas necessary to get their lot sizes altered based on profit or loss so now there is a means to set lower and upper limits of equilibrium. If it reaches the limit you then receive an alert or telling.

    Second, I detected a much bigger problem particularly on higher risk setups. What occurred was the ea would close out all transactions at a specific degree but the matrix eas didn't understand to change the lot size and thus it just continued with the same lot dimensions. As an example, let us say the maximum dd was 40% and the equilibrium was 5,000. If the maximal dd was reached then in a perfect world (no slippage) we would have only 3,000 left. If your settings called for 0.01 lot for each 500 then you had your lot dimensions in 0.10 but after the reduction it should be in 0.06. The lot size is currently 80% bigger than it should be. Before, I'd notice this and then I'd change it but the movement occurred overnight and in the morning I didn't have time to get it and then I saw that many draw-downs got struck twice. Maybe it might have happened anyways but just to be on the safe side, I have added a choice to have the platform after the transactions are closed. It will send an alert/notifiion together with the account number if you've enabled it and then shut. This can be disabled but I invite you to utilize it. For the album, I wanted to just disable eas like you can perform manually by clicking the button in the top but I didn't see any means to do this so the following option was just to close the platform that does the same thing. If anyone knows how to achieve this then let me know how and I will make the change.

    Once more I will not be publicly releasing the mq4 as it also needs an include and I think it will just confuse people but anyone desiring the source code can pm me and I will gladly send it to them. There are no dlls so that you do not have to think about me playing with any funny games.
    https://www.forexsoutheast.asia/atta...1549335462.ex4

  2. #2
    The main reason why I need it to be inactive is I am occupied first of all and second of all that I need this to be a thread just for help operating the ea and possibly tips for improvement. Any discussion about mgt including max dd I believe should be in that thread since that's not my ea. Really this ea is universal too. It would work in any scenario where you needed a max dd. In those instances you would have to modify lot sizes so it does not matter. As it is universal, this thread may entice other individuals too but once they understand how it works they should not have a lot to say. Maybe I am missing something.

  3. #3
    You really do not honestly believe that this item will work on the very long term, right? .
    This EA is absolute gaming with high risk.

  4. #4
    There's an update. Thanks to https://www.forexsoutheast.asia/cryp...ot-points.html, I've a means to disable most of eas without closing the platform. The ch is that you must now let dlls so you will find an alert in case you allow the shutdown feature but don't allow dlls. This is to warn you that the platform is going to be shutdown rather than simply penalizing all eas upon reaching maxdd. The document in the first place will be updated. Basically you don't need to allow dlls, but if you don't you wont get the new feature.

  5. #5
    If you say that it will disable most of EA's, do you mean that it is going to turn off AutoTrading and leave all of live orders intact to run their course, or will it also close all live orders?

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    When you state it will disable most of EA's, do you imply it will turn off AutoTrading and leave all live orders intact to run their course, or can it also shut all live orders?
    Ok so lets be clear. As I stated in the very first article, there's an inherit issue when you shut all orders with any ea or perhaps manually. If the orders are closed, you have taken a reduction. After the reduction, according to standard money management the lot size should go down because now you have less cash. However, when the ea closes all the orders, mgt will open new orders as if nothing happened but in the same (now wrong) lot dimensions. This could cause it to get to the maximum dd again and even faster since the lot size is too high. To overcome this issue, I decided to enable the option to disable most of eas after the orders are closed so mgt doesn't open new orders in the incorrect lot dimensions. However, I could not find a way to do so I decided to shut mt4 after the orders closed. Then cja gave me the code to perform it so now if you'd like you could have it disable eas after the orders are closed but it takes you to enable dlls. I think this is much better because after you reopen the platform mgt could still open orders in the incorrect lot dimensions but using eas handicapped, it gives you time to make the required modifiions and then re-enable eas.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote I am with you on this. However, I think there is still room for live testing different lot sizes, TP settings, and from my recent experience MultiLotFactor settings (particularly with TrendChange). I would also like to see MaxDD applied to every pair separately but love this might be impossible unless incorporated into MGT CE.
    That is possible without altering mgt. Actually it's not that much harder. Instead of calculating everything together, it is going to calculate per pair. I am not sure this really matters. There are some factors. First, usually there is one of a few scenarios. Either you've got just one pair that's the issue or a few. If it's one then the ones which aren't causing a problem get closed for a reduction but they were not losing that much to begin with. What can happen though is that the other pairs will continue to trade and then they may be trading with too much risk after the reduction so anyways you would have wanted to stop trading. If it is a few pairs then you needed to close them all out. Because I really don't see too much of a benefit, I don't know when I have the time to implement it.

    I have another idea that I want to work on first. Basically I have demos and it is slowing down my host. What I need to do is conduct one presentation per pair using a max dd indior (or maybe just have the maxdd ea log it) and the max dd for every set will probably be 50% since I visit 50% as the red line for most people and for myself. When looking back in the indior or log data I am going to be able to establish what really was the maxdd we would have needed. This way I will eliminate the need for many demos. There are issues with this manner since we won't see exactly what the account could have made but that I just cannot continue this way a lot longer. The reason for this and not expecting mt4 is since I think mt4 doesn't calculate unrealized loss as drawdown. If you had 49.9% dd and then it recovered then for mt4 this isn't dd. What's going to happen and it's going to be perceived as dd is trades will strike the tp at a reduction and for the few milliseconds that pass between every trade closure it will be considered dd and then you will think you had 10 percent dd or anything. In the event the profitable trades closed then there will be no dd but that which we call dd isn't even be computed. They also base the dd% on the max balance. Another advantage here is that we will be able to find out what settings of increased risk would have functioned. If some settings had 10 percent dd then you could triple the risk in case you were willing to accept 30 percent dd for instance.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    This thread is only a thread that I'm starting to avoid hijacking the Matrix Grid thread however I anticipate this to be a somewhat inactive thread. This will be used for explanations and questions of the MaxDd ea. The initial version simply took a dimension of the dd and then closed out all orders as it hit the max. This update adds a few features. To begin with I noticed I was having trouble keeping track of that eas needed to get their lot sizes changed based on profit or loss so now there's a way to set lower and upper limits of balance. In case...
    Fxtrader, I have read your article and I can tell you that the majority of the characteristics which you have described have already been coded from blessingSRmargin. I have been playing attaching the account balance to lot size. As an example, you've got 2k and you define it as .02 lot dimensions. Account rises to 3k, ea starts doing .03 lot, account drops to 900$, ea starts doing .01 lots. You can also define maxDD shutdown, max margin shutdown, max account balance shutdown etc.. Concerning DD shutdown, I prevent it for all price and I will sacrifice some profitability for lower DD at the long run, unless you enjoy taking those tremendous hits. Now if you run really hot setting, then you could be able to become more profitable, consider that reduction and have $ in your pocket. . .recover quickly, then rinse repeat. However, what if you suffer a couple of such hits in a row? Calls for some testing, but its a rather risky egy. I think that efforts should be put towards repairing the core of the difficulty - DD with some sort of hedge.

    Best, Josh

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote Fxtrader, I have read your article and I will tell you that the majority of the features you have described have already been coded in blessingSRmargin. I have been playing attaching the account balance to lot size. For instance, you've got 2k and you define it as .02 lot dimensions. Account increases ea starts doing .03 lot, account drops to 900$, ea starts doing .01 lots. Also you can define maxDD shutdown, max margin shutdown, max account equilibrium shutdown etc.. About DD shutdown, I prevent it for all price and that I will sacrifice some profitability...
    U got that indior or EA?

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote Fxtrader, I have read your post and I can tell you that most of the characteristics which you have described have already been coded in blessingSRmargin. I have been playing with attaching the account balance to lot size. For instance, you have 2k and you define it as .02 lot size. Account increases to 3k, ea starts doing .03 lot, account drops to 900$, ea starts doing .01 lots. Also you can define maxDD shutdown, maximum margin shutdown, max account equilibrium shutdown etc.. About DD shutdown, I prevent it for all price and I will sacrifice some profitability...
    I have played around with all the Blessing ea a little and to be honest it is a bit overwhelming. I am not attempting to introduce this in rivalry to the Blessing ea. This only began as a way for people to trade this ea if they want to with some way of restricting risk and of coping with the other problems like lot size changing etc.. Also the thread/ea owner isn't very active so instead of wait for some changes I just created an ea that could do some of what I desired. If we determine that we ought to only be using the boon ea then what exactly are we here for? 1 thing that GT likes to reconcile is the tendency isn't based on indiors which Blessing can't say but I still see enough whipsawing to mention that I do not know whether it matters.

    Another thing that needs to be said I believe is that risk and dd and profits are relative. I'm running a set that appears to be profitable on 0.01 lots per 1k with a maximum dd of 30%. But if you like the set by way of instance and you want less dd then you can just do 0.01 lots per 2k with a maximum dd of 15% or 0.01 lots per 3k with a maximum dd of 10%. All will likely be profitable in theory so long as the initial one is profitable. I like the idea of maximum dd though because as you said, every set at some point will fulfill it is death trade. So if we know that the ea makes a certain quantity of money on average and also we see how it recovers then that is better since we never have to find that death trade. Yes 30% is a lot but 3 hits in a row isn't 90%. You'd 10k and got struck so now you've 7k. You'd 7k and got struck so now you have 4.9k. You'd 4.9k so now you have 3.43k. That is still a 66% reduction but it's not 90% and that is the reason we are analyzing and this may be made better with reduced risk. That place made 26% this week. We have to see how it does work but if we only assume that this is an average week (it got struck once so I say it is not that far off from ordinary ) then half that would be 13% a week and then 3 15% losses in a row could be a 39% reduction. That is recoverable at a month in 13% a week and of course the question would have to be asked, after every the number of months would this occur? There is really no way to know without assessing and analyzing with no backtesting will require a long time which is the reason why I'm using cent accounts. 1 cent account got blown up but that has been because I forgot to put the maximum dd ea within an account that I raised the risk on. I have a cent account I have been utilizing 0.01 per 2.5k and it's been performing well. The dd has been manageable.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners.