Greetings to all prospective traders,
A while ago I started a thread Why is the martingale manner the only manner in forex? Connection: https://www.forexsoutheast.asia/fore...ring-pips.html
And as expected, I received massive journaling and warnings fromforexsoutheast.asiamembers (I know they did it using pure good goals) about the way martingale earlier or burns accounts, and I totally understand and agree with their point of view, because martingale needs boundless or sufficient cash to be functioning in concept, and that sort of cash is hard or impossible to come up with at the first loion.
Moreover, martingale risks the entire funds for small gains, and such gains and funds can go bust when things go wrong as they usually do. Some threads here inforexsoutheast.asiaand other sites discussing martingale egies and EA's imply a 'relativity secure' martingale using 5-10% monthly gains with passive preferences can cut the deal, but I do not think a 5 percent per month is well worth risking the whole capital.
Considering that the great majority of traders here concur that martingale egies = margin, and martingale consumers are always stuck with enormous DD and wished if things went differently, why don't you undo the whole thing? Rather than gaining little tiny pieces of profits per month and bust the account together with profits made later, why don't you sustain small pieces of losses per month and twice the account after, after regaining losses of course.
I know that the notion of anti-martingale or inverse martingale is not anything new, but I did not see any platform which completely reverse real conventional martingale EA procedure. By way of instance, a conventional martingale EA begins with a buy or a market based on a specific egy or on random, then sets the TP at 10 pips, with no stop loss. If TP is struck the EA enters a new trade on following candle. However, if the market went against the first position by over a specific amount of pips, say 10 pips, a new position of an increased lot size by 1.2 multiplier is started at second candle, and TP is corrected for all positions so the overall profits = sum of lot dimensions* 10 pips ( the intial TP amount) and so on till the common TP is struck, or a margin call happens. Becoming conservative with the settings by reducing initial lot size, TP and multiplier factor and increasing the pip stage where new positions needs to be added, makes the machine run a bit longer before the disaster eventually happens. While being aggressive in the settings accelerates bankruptcy. Bearing in mind the more positions being added while increasing lot sizes at a specific factor, makes the TP degree a bit easier to strike, but the TP gets somehow far away and demands a big retracement to strike it.
So far so good, I think most of traders concur with me till this stage.
Now literally undo the whole thing, open a position on random or according to a specific egy, place SL at 10 pips without TP. If the SL is struck no problem, open another transaction at next candle according to entry rules (not always the exact same direction of last position). Now if the marker moves into our favour by a particular amount of pip step, add a new place another candle with an increased lot size by multiplier factor and adjust the SL so that the entire reduction= sum of lot dimensions* 10 pips (first SL amount). For the departure in profit, close all transactions when a particular amount of $ profits is attained, you can place that into 50% of funds or 100 percent or what ever floats your boat. Bear in mind the common SL level now can also be more difficult to reach when you proceed with many opened positions, very similar to TP in original martingale. This should in theory give your transactions more room to breath till the desired money goal is acquired.
In conclusion, the tiny pieces of yearly profits in original martingale are now the small monthly losses in inverse. And the margins in the original martingale are now doubling the account in inverse, or 50 percent DD in original martingale is now 50% profit in inverse.
In theory that sounds good, but in fact other factors may contribute to the desired result. For instance what if the account is emptied out before hitting the jackpot? What settings for lot size, multiplier factor, pip step, SL, cash TP ought to be used? Which pairs would be the best? Answers for these questions are decided by people who lost money with martingale without being able to double their original investment, but nothing is guaranteed in forex as all of us know.
This wild idea struck me while I was carrying out a ****, so I thought I'd share it here because it makes some kind of sense, so please let me know what you guys think. And as usual, I welcome all types of constructive criticism and friendly bashing.
Peace.