tradelover

Depinde de apetitul pe care il ai pentru risk, si de perioada pe care vrei sa investesti. Daca vrei sa investesti pe termen lung (luni, ani) atunci cumpara actiuni. Daca cumperi actiuni, atunci "devii proprietar" pe o parte (infima) din companie. Adica ti se dau actiunile, efectiv. Hartie. Titlu de proprietate. Peste un timp poti sa le vinzi cu ceva profit, ori cu ceva pierdere, depinde de evolutia companiei. Cel mai rau caz este daca VISA da faliment (situatie foarte improbabila, ca sa nu zic imposibila!), caz in care ai pierdut toti banii pe care i-ai investit. Daca lucrurile merg intr-adevar nasol, valoarea actiunilor poate sa scada cu 10, 20, 50 la suta, sau chiar mai mult, si atunci pierzi "doar" procentajele respective (10, 20, etc la suta) din banii investiti, dar asta poate lua luni sau ani se zile, timp in care primesti dividende pe actiunile care le ai (well, daca merge rau, nu primesti nimic, poate chiar o sa trebuiasca sa mai contribui cu ceva, dar plec de la premiza ca nu vor merge rau de la inceput, vor fi perioade "rele" si perioade "bune", la inceput mai mult bune, iar daca o sa se strice treaba, evolutia "rea" va fi scurta si rapida). Pe de alta parte, daca VISA creste precum se prefigureaza, iti poti dubla capitalul in acelasi interval de timp (luni, ani), chiar tripla, ori mai mult. Comparat cu CFD, actiunile sunt o investitie "de un milion de ori" mai "sigura". Pe de alta parte, cumparand CFD, cu aceeasi bani poti cumpara (maxim) de 10 ori mai multe contracte. Nu ti se da nimic in mana, actiuni (titluri de proprietate), or else, doar "semnezi" o hartie care pt tine nu are nici o valoare, doar pt writer are valoare (writerul e ala care iti vinde, ala cu care pariezi, cel care detine portofoliul de actiuni, direct sau prin firma de brokeraj). Trebuie sa depui o marja, din care pierzi daca valoarea contractelor scade. Daca valoarea lor scade cu mai mult de 10%, atunci ori le vinzi, si ai pierdut aceeasi bani pe care i-ai fi pierdut la actiuni daca VISA dadea faliment, ori mai depui bani in margine. Deci atentie, la CFD POTI SA PIERZI MAI MULT decat investitia initiala. Pe aceea o pierzi la o cadere de doar 10%, in comparatie cu o cadere de 100% (faliment) in cazul actiunilor. Din acest punct de vedere, CFD este "de un milion de ori" mai risky. Pe de alta parte, daca valoarea actiunilor VISA se dubleaza in urmatorul an, la CFD castigi de 10 ori mai mult!!! (pentru ca teoretic, ai cumparat de 10 ori mai multe actiuni, practic nu ai cumparat nimic, ai pus doar un pariu). Pe termen scurt, CFD e bun. Risti mult, poti pierde mult, dar poti si castiga mult. Eu personal, daca m-as pricepe oleaca la economie, si daca as avea bani de riscat, si "ceva in cap" (charturi, cunostinte despre situatia economica si financiara a companiei, etc, nu doar zvonuri auzite la prieteni sau la TV) care sa ma faca sa cred ca actiunile VISA vor creste pe perioada urmatoare, si as vrea neaparat sa investesc in ele, atunci as imparti suma in doua, cu circa 80% din bani as cumpara actiuni, iar cu restul de 20% as lua CFD, leverat 5 la 1. Pentru detalii cum lucreaza CFD (si contractele futures in general) vezi aici, se explica foarte bine. Spor!

I just got in my inbox today a nice article about charting the equivolumes, that was published by MQ in their MT4 site. Please click on it. This article is prefacing somehow my next topic, that I wanted to discuss long time ago, about trading the time, part 3. I had no time to finish my posting, so I will post a "part 3" now, just to mention it, and in the future I hope I will find enough free time to post a next episode about charting techniques. That would be renamed to "part 4" or else The article above is discussing a technique to chart volumes of ticks together with the price movement. You can spend some time to read it and understand it, as that could be quite useful in forming you as a good trader. However, the solution proposed by the author is not the most elegant one. I will not go bitchy to criticize his methods, this is not the goal of this post. The article is very interesting, and is a must to read. I only want to say that pointing the charts according with a fixed number of ticks per bar was discussed long time ago in IBFX and codebase forums, and I also posted some of my indicators there. They were posted on vamist.com forum too, at that time (few months ago), and also in some different places. Using such indicators makes our life easier, when it come to the point of getting such fix-tick-amount charts in real time. The goal of this blog entry is to post the indicator again, and I will refer to it in the future. You can set the tick count parameter to a value N, and one new candle will be drawn in separate window every time after N ticks arrived. You can use this indicator to estimate the "speed" of the market, by opening 2 or 3 different windows with different N (somebody on InterbankFX MT4 forum, where a preliminary version of the indicator was posted, suggested that time that the "periods" can be in a Fibo sequence, as 21, 34, 55 ticks, or 34, 55, 89, but I like to use smaller numbers as 13, 21, 34, for example, the difference in speed could be seen much easier. That was a long discussion there, but unfortunately I can't give you the link, as IBFX dismounted their forums ...). I have to post it again, because most probably it suffered some changes since that time. I don't have time to check which versions I posted, and where. Most probable the posted versions have no moving average for the tick-chart, as this feature was added much later. I will come back to this point soon. Till then, here is the toy: Tick_Tick_Tick.mq4 and here is a sketch with his abilities (3 indicators on chart, with 3 different N): Be reminded that the candles are NOT corespondent, i.e. the candles on the chart and the candles on the indicators have different open time, even if they have the same shift left. If the parameter N (period) is smaller, then the chart is running faster, that is why you can see on the indicator's charts, in fact, only the last drop of the price. This indicator will "expand" the price action when the market is getting crazy, i.e. it will go into the details of the movements. I have marked with ellipses of 2 different colors the corespondent area in all 4 graphs, so you can see how the "expanding" works. By measuring the difference between the 3 windows below the chart, one can have an idea if the trend is getting steams or is getting sleeping pills... You can see how the "confusion" of the two moving averages (especially in the mid window) is somehow predicting the "boring" day (and lazy market) that was today. I am still using this toy sometime, together with PF, and I will explain later how. There is something related to moving averages, crosses, differences in speed. Just now, I only used the opportunity offered by publishing of the mentioned article in MT4 forum today, to bring into the discussion such tool, because is connected to our subject about trading the time. More to come. Happy pipping! .t.

iar m-am ţâcnit, imi dau replici singur... Bun, am sters floricelele de la semnatura, si mi-am schimbat parerea despre onix. Muţufani. Le-am scris acum 2 zile si nici un rezultat. Intre timp am dat un sort dupa server name, si am constatat ca mai este un user de al lor in aceeasi situatie, cu serverul de la IBFX, si ala are contul creat mai demult. Deci bubufanii de la onix au undeva in baza lor de date adresa gresita pt serverul de la IBFX (ibfx au schimbat de vo juma de an adresele la servere, pagina de web, etc, poate de aia). Am facut alt cont la onix, unde am selectat alt broker, m-am uitat in lista sa vad la ce brokeri apar banii. Adica e valida conexiunea, am luat unul la intamplare, am intrat pe web si am facut cont, am inregistrat contul la onix. Au aparut banii cam in 20 de minute. L-am sters. Nu am timp sa navighez printre brokeri.... Contul creat la IBFX ramane incontinuare accesibil, si ramane incontinuare tranzactionat complet automat. Userul si parola de investor raman aceleasi care au fost date pe site-ul de la onix, adica: Server: InterbankFX Demo Login in MT: 1816236 Invest password: investor1 Daca nu apar banii pe site la onix si nu primesc raspuns de la ei pe mail in cateva zile, voi sterge subscriptia de la onix cu totul. Contul de la ibfx va ramane incontinuare accesibil, pana ma razgandesc, ori pana se goleste. Daca aveti intrebari despre tranzactii, feel free to ask... Deocamdata profitul este 5.5% in 3 zile, hihi. Dar asta nu va tine mult. Pe real nu am tupeul sa il las sa faca asa multe tranzactii simultan... Acum a prins directia, dar se putea tot asa de bine ca directia sa fie invers...

@Pharaoh I have read all your links last night. That FPA... hmm... Good Job, man! Keep going. If you know how, and if you have possibilities, then drag down the bastards! And btw, welcome here.

Multumesc mult nicu si iordaki ! acu, daca e de asteptat, ma duc sa pap ceva de pranz, ca e 12 juma' si imi mananca halimosii astia tot orezul...

waaaa! real? esti tare nene.... Sa iti fie intr-un ceas bun!! Amu... ce e cu suta aia de parai, tu in loc sa scoti, depui? bun, acu zi si mie te rog frumos, ce tre sa fac sa primesc mailurile in engleza, ca mi-or trimis un mai (in afara de ala de confirmare) in care apare ceva de genul ะ”ะพะฑั€ะพ ะฟะพะถะฐะปะพะฒะฐัั ะฒ ัะธััะตะผั onix-trade.net ------------------------------------------------------ ะ”ะพะฑั€ะพ ะฟะพะถะฐะปะพะฒะฐัั ะฝะฐ ะฝะฐั ัะฐะนั! (care pe tailandeza nu inseamna nimic, dar probabil outlukexpresu meu confunda rusa cu tailandeza) apoi, ce sa fac sa imi apara banii in cont, tre sa intru pe undeva, ori doar sa astept pana maine? parola de investor e corecta, puteti verifica. de cand vorbim, am facut 24 de pipsi, hihi.

Dincolo de discutia de mai sus, ideea unui link direct la acont din forum este destul de faina. Am intrat si eu la onix si mi-am "agatzat" un cont nou noutz, demo, mini, ibfx, cu 1000 de parai in el. Dat fiind marimea lotului, ar trebui sa fie echivalent cu unul de 10k standard. Ia sa vedem ce iese, vreo 2 luni de zile... Adica eu sa nu am semnatura smekera? hihi... Bun, acuma obiectiv, pagina aia e meseriasa din punct de vedere statistic. Cati castiga? Cati pierd? Care sunt procentele de profit? Dati o raita si uitati-va pe la toti, sa va faceti o idee. Cati au conturi reale? Cati demo? Ce sume risca traderii, in general? Foarte instructiv! Multi o sa va schimbati unele pareri despre trading... hihi... Pana atunci, eu si semnatura mea hoatza, mai jos. Contul va fi tranzactionat in intregime automat, 4 experti diferiti, printre care si stitch, caruia i-am dat liber sa puna cate biduri vrea in acelasi timp, si pe ce directie vrea, nu conteaza swapul. In afara de Stitch pe care il stiti, mai exista un expert care pune biduri pe PF, un altul care incearca sa intre pe termen lung (doar cu loturi de 0.01 si doar in directia lui nenea swapul) si un scalper care incearca doar sa repare bubele. Adica daca vede ca un order se indreapta spre SL, o sa incerce sa recupereze suma jucand in contra orderului respectiv, cu loturi mari, in asa fel incat daca ma duc in stop la orderul respectiv, sa ies aproape de BE. Uneori merge... Alteori pierzi mai mult... Later Edit: Nu m-am prins inca cum merge, se logeaza odata pe zi, sau cum? Ca vad ca suma in cont e zero... Mai asteptam... Any idea?

Ghici ce citesc eu azi in bkk post? hihi Horror story Officials in Transylvania spent $200,000 on a luxury coach for Dracula sightseeing tours - only to find it was too big to get through the city gates. Entry to the old centre of Brasov is through 10ft mediaeval gates and councillors were embarrassed to find the double-decker coach was too high. They had invested the money in an attempt to attract more tourists to the city to boost the local economy. One Brasov councillor said: "Unbelievably nobody ever thought to measure the gates and compare it with the height of the bus. "It's a complete waste of money. We have no idea what to do now."

Absolut TOTI brokerii care sunt regulati trimit banii inapoi EXCLUSIV pe calea/contul si numele de pe care au fost incarcati. Nu are nimic de-a face cu broker-ul, ci de legislatia internationala (AML=anti money laundering), pentru a impiedica transferurile mascate de bani, finantarea organizatiilor teroriste, bla bla...., altfel le taie fiscu' craca. Un broker care spune ca puteti sa il incarcati prin card si sa va luati eventualul profit prin TT, ori invers, este CEL PUTIN dubios! S-a mai discutat pe aici, dar e bine de amintit din cand in cand

sarutmana nicu si phaeton! am gasit, vineeeee.... sa vedem ce poate, cand s-o termina

Ia ziceti si mie despre ce vorbiti voi acolo? un nume de autor, un titlu, ceva care sa imi permita sa dau cu searchul dupa el pe undeva pe iutube, or else, ca se pare ca fairvalu nostru tailandez blocheaza "video.google.com" Si ca sa fiu ontopic cu forexu, tot se zice in stanga si in dreapta ca atunci cand incepi sa castigi, brokerul te trece pe dealing desk. Acuma nu stiu ce va tot speriati de dilingdeskul asta, ca nu e nimic iesit din comun, toata lumea are dilindesk, la brokeri, la servici, acasa, in familie... de exemplu eu tocmai am constatat ca providerul meu de internet are dilingdesc la conexiune: cum incep sa aduc cate ceva date mai consistente, cum crapa... Asta am vazut aseara incercand sa caut dupa filmul vostru, fara nici o pista de pornire, am incercat sa ghicesc cam despre ce ati putea vorbi si sa vad daca ma prind uitandu-ma prin filmuletele cu tematica conspirationista de pe iutub si yahoo... Nu am reusit decat sa aduc niste muzica rap, dar si aia cu batalie mare impotriva dilindescului. In schimb am obtinut o gramada de mesaje de genul "departamentul de politie nu stiu care blocheaza acest site datorita continutului ne-conform cu politica de stat"... Well, dealing desk... Drept urmare m-am dus la culcare cu o idee geniala in cap. Stiti... mi se intampla uneori sa ma culc seara cu o problema si sa ma scol a doua zi cu solutia. Ori macar cu cateva idei cum se poate rezolva. Nu-i asa ca si voua vi se intampla uneori? Nu stiu cum, dar cumva creierul munceste peste noapte. Am citit despre niste mari fizicieni (parca Faraday) care isi luau la capul patului o hartie si un creion, daca le vine v-o idee peste noapte sa nu o piarda pana cand se trezesc in zori. Cred ca tre sa o pun si eu in practica, ca nu stiu cate mii de idei bune am pierdut, ma trezeam noapte si ziceam "gataaaa... asta e!", dar apoi dimineata cand ma sculam uitam despre ce era vorba... Ce bun ar fi fost carnetelul ala... Well, deci aseara m-am dus la culcare suparat pe dilingdesk, si cu o idee colosala in cap, din pacate nu i-am gasit solutia inca, si nici nu stiu de unde sa incep... Nici macar in vis nu m-am trezit cu vo pista de plecare... ca am dormit bustean. Problema mea era asa (si mai este inca): Daca toata lumea are dilingdesc, cum sa fac eu sa pun un dilingdesc pe banii nevestemii cand se duce la shoping? Huh? acu sa va vad...

This is a part of more complex tool, including the daily shifts of the stochastic, beside of H4 shifts exemplified above. I did the same thing for daily charts, but painting 4 stochastic indicators, one is the default one, as given by my broker, and other 3 correspond to the Asian, London and NY sessions, they are also daily, but shifted with the right amount of hours. It make no sense to do this for hourly, as all brokers start the hour at XX:00 sharp, and also is quite irrelevant for weekly charts. But for H4 and daily, THERE ARE discrepancies that CAN be traded!! Yet, I don't know how... Putting all together, this tool is very complex and far away to be complete, and I am still working on it, to complete it. I did not make any real money with it, but it shows good results on demo. I am trying to do something like "stochastic arbitrage" , starting from the idea that if the stoch lines spread, they have to come together again somehow, in the future. But the results are.... not significant, as it was discussed before in The Economist's blog, there is no potential to make any arbitrage with only one instrument, the market is laughing at you when you are less expecting it... You need a second instrument to hedge, otherwise it appears like no profit can be made. Regardless of good or bad results, this tool will not be distributable. If it is good, I will keep it for myself, if it is bad, make no sense to distribute it. People here know: if I want to give something for free, it is posted already. I don't sell tools for money yet, so no meaning to ask But I gave you the idea, you can do your homework. If you did not started already to program MQL, maybe this is a good opportunity I have the advantage of being a good programmer, but from trading point of view, with this method I am exactly in the same point as you are: experimenting. This is not a "sandpapered" method, just an "axed" one yet...

By the way, happy pillaging for 2008! Well, when talking about the time, there are mainly three schools. Some traders would say that the time is very important. They use candlesticks or bars charts, volumes, money flow index and other tools like that. This category of traders is the largest, and they use manly the price action on their trades, but they consider the time into the equation too. In fact, they use the time "partially". All these methods of charting that I enumerated above are in fact "time dependent" charting. You plot on the chart the price action, in time. That is, on X axis is the time, and on Y axis is the price. But here, time's contribution ends. For every candle, you know the opening and closing time, but that's all. By changing the time frame to a more granulated one, as from daily to hourly, you can have an idea about how the price developed inside of one candle. Eventually, you can get some information about the time when highest price and lowest price were reached, information that is not stored in the daily chart. But you still won't get any clue about the real movement of the price in time, about the "speed" of the price (speed is the time differential), or about the "acceleration" of the price. Indicators as momentum, or ROC, or other, are trying to give you a coarse view of these "time-actions" of the price, but they are also stored "bar by bar" and they are not of much help. There is a second school (category) of traders that put the time in the first place. They don't use fixed hours, like opening and closing of sessions, or important moments during the week or the month, but a continuous "movement" of the price, and they use different type of charts that show the time-action of the price in the first place. This method use the time in the first place, and then the price. They plot on their charts information as "speed of the price" and "acceleration of the price" and few of them include also weekends into the hotpot. Together with second level quotations, this is a very strong instrument for a momentum ECN trader, but as such brokers require a big amount of money to play with, very few is known about this strategies, and they are not really useful for small traders like us, thus such charting methods are not so common. Maybe I would post in the future some technicals about "total time" trading, like polygraphs and multi-tick charts, but that is not the subject of the current entry. What I would like to talk about now, is the third class of traders: that traders are not using the time at all. Yes, there is a big lot of traders that trade only the price. Most of them are big fish and they won't talk about their methods. They will keep intoxicating you with bars and candlesticks, as their goal is to gain the money that you are going to lose. They are mainly fundamental traders, that look to the economical data and plot their charts not as bars or candles, but totally time-independent. These traders are not interested in the TIME when a movement of the price took place, but only in the MOVEMENT itself. You can look on investopedia for Renko charts, or Kagi charts, to have an image about how these charts works. But incontestable, the king of "timeless" charting is Point And Figure (called below PF). Kagi charting is a very good tool to show the differences between supply and demand, and can be used by itself in trading long-term-trending markets, with quite a good risk/reward ratio. Kagi works like a Stop And Reverse technique and can give nice profits if traded with a StopLoss on classical SAR indicator curve. Renko charts represent just a pale time-spreading of point & figure charts, and they had some appeal to the people because most of the small traders have their mind "deformed" by candlesticks and bars. They like to see the "time-spreading" of the price in front of their eyes, and they don't feel comfy seeing only the columns of PF. That is where Renko charts come in. The disadvantage of PF is that you can't see the time at all. There is no NortEast/SouthEast movement, but only North/South columns. But this come with an advantage too: trading PF you will improve your discipline. Because you are not anymore interested of price action inside of any square. You just place your trades when the squares change according with your strategy entry, and close them when the squares change according with your strategy exit. If you don't know what I am talking about, you can find and read some materials on web, about PF trading strategies. There is plenty of good (and not so good) books about. But the big advantage of PF is the time frame that you can see in front of your eyes. What? Didn't I just said that PF is not using the time? Well, it is not. But PF is a "highly condensed" form of the price action. For a normal H1 chart you can see in front of your eyes, depending on your screen resolution, about half a year of price action, even if you go to the lowest magnification factor. If your pair is moving in average 30 pips per hour (common value for some pairs) then your PF chart with a box size of 30 will show you on the screen the price action for the last few years! The resistances and supports are also more reliable, as they are not dependent of broker's behavior (as for example few brokers, like IBFX will show a Sunday candle, other not, this is "pushing" you trendlines on a normal candlestick chart to a different angles). Moreover, the "quiet" periods of the market are compressed in few squares, but the "agitated" periods (that with more opportunities to make money, or... lose money) are expanded. You also can select which box size you like, so it can "fit" you even if you are a long term investor or an intraday scalper. Changing the "time frame" of you candles won't change the "looking" of a PF chart, as they are not time-dependent. So, the big advantage of PF charting is the fact that PF charting is not time-dependent, and it concentrates only on the price action. Well, then what is its big disadvantage? Arrr... well... his big disadvantage is the fact that PF charting is not time-dependent... Don't smile! I know Asimov said it before me (see the end of his novel "The Naked Sun"). You can not see the opening and closing time of sessions, you can not see the weekends, you can not trade the "momentum", and YES, you CAN NOT see anything inside of the squares. Each square is a black box for you, even if it is an X, an O, a green rectangle or a red one, for you all are black boxes. You must wait for the price to jump outside of the box to be able to take any decisions. So, my problem long time ago was how to improve the utility of the PF charts. Like for example to add to each box some useful info about how the price action inside of the box was. Was it choppy? Was it smooth? How may times the price tried to go out of the box? How long time the price stayed inside of the box? Couldn't be nicer if you were able to see the "fighting"... inside the boxes? Can a box in the middle of a column work as resistance or support level? Can it? Exactly! I tried to add some time-information to the PF charting. There is not a big deal to do so. It is also quite easy to program it. The big deal is how to represent everything in graphical form to be easy to read, and nice-looking. The idea came somewhere in the mid of the last year, when I got from vamist some PF-charting indicator made by a Russian guy. The indicator itself was not a big deal, it does not consider at all the reversal amount , and it has a lot of bugs. But it gave me the graphical idea. That time we had long discussions on the forum and I tried to put all together and make a nice PF charting tool. I posted some graphics together with their comments and I distributed the tool to some Romanian friends. Few bugs popped up and I had to rewrite a part of it, and later on I added also the history stuff, together with a new version number. There are plenty of comments inside of the source code, so you better read them all before using the toy. Everything is provided "as is" and I won't take any responsibility for your loses, and also I won't claim any of your money in case you make any profit . Here is the toy, and I am quite sure many of you are expecting it. It just took me some time to make some pictures and put everything in a zip. But now, as you got the indicators, be careful, having this files won't make you PF-Master overnight. If you never traded PF charts, better look for a book first, make few strategies, and try to trade them (test them) by your own and with demo money for a while. M_PF.ZIP Open to any question and suggestion. .t. P.S. By the way, does anyone have a good and freeware Gif Animator?? One who won't make a 5MB file from just few slides.... I tried to attach a small animation with B-Rays and B-Flags, but the file seems to be too big to be accepted by the blog (it says "unlimited space" but....)

Mersic, acum ma simt mult mai bine . Imi editez semnatura imediat, chiar ma gandeam sa o schimb in viitor, ca asta s-a cam invechit... Macar de ar fi ca vinul, hihi sa ii creasca valorea pe masura ce se invecheste... Ar mai fi de pus pe lista si titlurile de treaduri, in care apar tot semne de intrebare. De exemplu un tread mai vechi al Fetei Morgana care tocmai a popup-at in urma unui post al lui Marco de zilele trecute, inca se mai numeste "Piramidand mi?c?rile mari"

GRRRRRR!!! Mrrr!! Ham! Ham! Serverul nou nu stie unicode? Nu ca as face eu exces de diacritice, dar le folosesc acolo unde pot interveni interpretari. Acu vad ca nu mai suntem in "carti" ci suntem in "c?r?i", si nu mai suntem "in fata" (scris cu diacritice ca sa nu intrebe careva de ce nu suntem in baiat?) ci de fapt suntem "?n fa??".... Poate le faci la loc. Nu e nevoie sa corectezi prin posturi, corectez eu personal in ale mele, doar sa le afiseze cum trebuie. Sarutmana si happy pips pe 08!

Cu o mica rectificare: un fund manager adevarat nu cere mai mult de 15% din profit, cu asa se merge cam peste tot, dar depinde si de marimea contului. Un cont mai mic implica mai multa munca raportat la profit. Adica daca ai 2000 de parai in cont si ala face 30% pe an, s-ar putea sa iti ia jumatate din ei, adica 300 din cei 600 profit, ca doar n-o sa munceasca pe 90 de parai un an de zile (15% din 600). Sub suma asta nu se complica nimeni, in afara de sharlatani de tipul Steinitz. Poate o sa gasesti un "manager" la un cont de 1000 de parai, dar sperantele ca sa faca ala vreun profit din contul tau sunt... saracutze. Un tip care se complica la un cont cu bani asa putini urmareste de obicei sa faca ceva experiente pe banii tai. Peste 10 mii de parai in cont, 15% din profit este arhisuficient. Atentie la jocurile piramidale. Exista acum o moda ca diversi excroci sa pozeze in manageri de fonduri, si de fapt sa practice un caritas mascat, care nu are alt scop decat sa ingrase managerii. Procedeul e foarte simplu, ei aduna bani de la mai multi "investitori", fiecare investitor semneaza un contract serios, in care se specifica eventual ca daca managerul pierde mai mult de 10% din cont, trebuie sa acopere cu banii lui personali. O astfel de clauza "prinde" la clienti, aia se simt in siguranta, si vin cu bani. De fapt cand ati semnat asa ceva, ati dat voie implicit managerului sa "piarda" 10% din contul vostru, fara a avea vreun drept sa il trageti la raspundere in vreun fel pentru treaba asta. Mai ales ca odata cu asta semnati si instiintarile legate de risc, care vi le baga toti pe gat, si in care se spune ca banii de forex sunt bani pe care va permiteti sa ii pierdeti fara a va afecta traiul zilnic, pentru ca piata forex este o piata cu risc ridicat. Bun, ce face mai departe managerul nostru? foarte simplu, joaca cu jumatate dintre clienti impotriva celeilalte jumatati, pe termen mediu (biduri care tin o luna, ori pe acolo). La sfarsitul primei luni, jumatate dintre clienti au pierdut 10% din cont, iar cealalta jumatate au castigat 10% din cont, mai putin spreadurile, care sunt insignificante (tranzactii rare si lungi). Clientii care au pierdut nu pot face ABSOLUT NIMIC pentru ca managerul este acoperit de contractul facut, nici o instanta judecatoreasca din lume nu va admite vreo petitie pe tema asta cand i se pune hartia in fatza, singura obtiune a clientilor "nenorocosi" este sa inchida contul, ori sa ii permita managerului inca 10% in speranta ca se vor redresa. Ala le serveste placa cu "perioada nasoala", si unii inghit galusca. Iar clientii care au castigat vor plati managerului comisionul de 15% din profit si vor fi foarte fericiti, vor spune si la prieteni ce manager bun au ei, eventual vor mai veni cu bani ori vor aduce alte persoane "in joc". Si luna urmatoare situatia se poate repeta, sau se poate schimba pentru ei. De asemenea, dintre cei care au pierdut luna trecuta, dar au ales sa continue, este posibil ca luna urmatoare unii sa fie intre cei norocosi. Managerul va continua sa joace doar cu clientii care raman in joc, si sa nu se atinga de banii celor care sunt aproape de pierderea de 10% (si in felul asta nu va fi nevoit sa plateasca niciodata ceva din buzunarul propriu, pur si simplu cand se apropie de prag inceteaza brusc sa mai tranzactioneze cu contul ala, ori reduce loturile la minim-minim), dupa aceeasi simpla regula, o jumatate din bani impotriva celeialate jumatati din bani. Chestia asta poate merge la nesfarsit si el isi asigura lunar cele 15 procente din profit, adica 1.5% din totalul banilor manipulati. Cu nitica publicitate, ori cu procentaje diferite (pierdere de max 20%, comision de 20, 30, 50%, etc) "managerul" isi asigura cateva mii de dolari lunar cel putin, pentru care nu il poate NIMENI trage la raspundere. Un caritas foarte inteligent.... Asa ca atentie. Eu unul prefer sa ii pierd cu mana mea. Ce isi face omul cu mana lui, se numeste lucru manual... Hai pipsuiala spornica in 2008!

Leverage de 50 la 1 sau 100 la 1 reprezinta leverage-ul MAXIM pe care il permite brokerul. Nimeni, repet NIMENI nu poate tranzactiona cu leverage-ul maxim. Nu este posibil, fizic. Asta ar insemna ca "tranzactionezi de toti banii". Pentru a intelege exact despre ce e vorba, trebuie sa ne aducem aminte ca marginea este inversul leverage-ului. Daca am un cont de 1000 de dolari, care are urmatoarele caracteristici: - leverage de 200 la 1 - marimea lotului standard de 100k (ambele sunt importante si trebuie specificate!) atunci sa luam urmatoarele exemple: Deschid o pozitie pe XXX/USD (ca sa fie mai usor, in cazul asta am 10 dolari per pip per lot, nu mai trebuie sa fac transformarile, o sa presupun ca tranzactionam numai perechi cu USD in coada). Adica vand sau cumpar 0.1 loturi de XXX/USD. In cazul acesta, asta inseamna ca am tranzactionat zece mii de dolari. Pentru ca 0.1 loturi, ori 100k/lot inseamna 10k dolari. Deci am facut o tranzactie de zece mii de dolari, care inseamna de 10 ori mai mult decat am in cont. Deci in acest moment am un leverage CURENT de 10:1, pentru ca tranzactionez de 10 ori mai multi bani decat am in cont. Pentru ca sa vi se permita sa tranzactionati mai multi bani decat aveti, brokerul va obliga sa faceti un "depozit de incredere", care este numit MARJA, sau MARGINE. Acest depozit sunt bani care sunt pusi "deoparte" de catre broker si nu va mai puteti atinge de ei pana nu inchideti tranzactia. De ce face brokerul acest lucru? pentru ca sa va impiedice sa faceti tranzactii "nelimitate". De fiecare data cand deschideti o tranzactie, cativa bani sunt lusti din cont si pusi deoparte, in acest fel contul "scade". Veti primi acesti bani inapoi atunci cand inchideti tranzactia. Si daca tot deschideti tranzactii, fara a le inchide pe cele anterioare, contul va "scade" pana la o valoare (eventual zero) care nu va va mai permite sa deschideti noi tranzactii. Banii care raman in cont DUPA ce dam deoparte marginea se numesc "margin free", sau "free margin", adica bani care nu sunt blocati de catre marja, si care pot fi folositi in tranzactii. Foarte multi incepatori se tem de marginea asta, de parca ar fi nu stiu ce bau-bau. Ei nu inteleg ca marginea lucreaza in avantajul lor. DA! Marginea este un instrument in avantajul vostru! Pentru ca va impiedica sa pierdeti mai multi bani decat aveti in cont. Si este si in avantajul brokerului, pentru ca nu puteti tranzactiona sume nelimitate de bani, cauzand in acest fel pierderi atat voua cat si brokerului in cazul unei miscari nefavorabile. Marginea TREBUIE sa existe si sa lucreze asa cum e, si este o chestie foarte bine gandita. Brokeru trebuie sa va impiedice sa depasiti acel "leverage maxim admis" (in cazul nostru de 200 la 1) de aceea el va lua deoparte de fiecare data din contul vostru o suma egala cu T/M din cont, unde T este suma pe care o tranzactionati, iar M este leverage-ul maxim admis. Pentru exemplul nostru, 10000/200=50. Asta inseamna ca in momentul in care ati deschis tranzactia, in milisecunda imediat urmatoare, aveti in cont 950 de dolari care sunt "liberi" si inca 50 care sunt "blocati" in margine, de care nu va puteti atinge pana nu inchideti tranzactia. Am presupus ca spreadul este zero, ca sa nu incurc lucrurile. Paranteza: NU FACETI CONFUZIE intre leverage-ul maxim pe care il permite brokerul (la care nu veti fi capabili sa tranzactionati niciodata!!!!) si leverage-ul curent la care tranzactionati. De asemenea, daca tot am facut paranteza, vreau sa amintesc (am zis de o suta de ori pe aici!) ca tranzactia pe care tocmai am facut-o, trebuie tratata ca o investitie de 10 mii de dolari, si nu ca una de 50 de dolari pusi ca margine. Motivul pentru care cei mai multi tradri pierd este acela ca trateaza tradingul mai superficial decat shopingul. Daca mergeti la magazin sa cumparati o masina de 10 mii de dolari, cu siguranta ca o veti intoarce pe toate partile si veti voi sa o testati o perioada inainte de a da banii. Dar cand aruncati 10 mii de parai intr-o tranzactie, pariez ca sunteti gata sa o faceti intr-o clipa, la un click de mouse, fara macar sa va uitati la pret sau la indicatori. Tocmai ati investit 10 mii de dolari, cu sentimentul ca "bleah, tocmai am cumparat o zecime de lot, am pus margine de 50 de parai, ce mare scofala?". Asta e moarte sigura! Am incheiat paranteza Sa presupunem incontinuare ca piata sta pe loc. Nu se misca. Si decideti sa mai intrati cu inca o tranzactie de 20 de mii. Deci deschideti inca o tranzactie de 20 de mii de parai (0.2 loturi). Pentru aceasta marginea este de 20000/200=100 de parai, si aveti voie sa o deschideti pentru ca mai aveti inca 950 liberi, deci aveti de unde sa mai "dati" 100 la depozit. Dupa deschidere, aveti in cont 850 de dolari "liberi" si 100+50 blocati in margine. Sunteti in tranzactii cu 30 de mii in total, dar aveti in cont doar 1000 in total (liberi plus blocati) deci tranzactionati in momentul de faţă cu un leverage CURENT de 30000/1000 la 1. Adica 30:1. Adica trazactionati o suma de 30 de ori mai mare decat aveti "in mana". Acesta este leverage-ul, nu ala scris pe pagina brokerului. Deci sa fie clar: leverage-ul pe care il admite brokerul este leverage-ul MAXIM care va este permis. De cat aveti nevoie? 50 la 1? 100 la 1? 200? 400? Astea sunt ABERATII! Abureli. Chiar si un leverage maxim admis de 10 la 1 este SUFICIENT pentru un swing trader. Momentum-traderii au nevoie de ceva mai mult, poate 20 la 1, iar scalperii au nevoie poate de 30 sau maxim 40 la 1. Atat. Orice leverage curent PESTE aceasta cifra inseamna pierdere sigura! Pai de ce? Ia sa vedem. Pentru primul exemplu de mai sus, in care suntem in tranzactie cu 10k si am depus ca margine 50 de dolari. Fiecare pip in favoarea noastra ne poate aduce un dolar, iar fiecare pip impotriva noastra ne va face sa pierdem un dolar. La cat avem stopul? Sa zicem 40 de pipsi? Asta ar fi o valoare "normala" (grrrr!!!!) pentru perechea pe care o tranzactionam si pentru TF-ul in cauza. In acest caz o miscare total impotriva noastra ne va face sa pierdem 40 de pipsi, adica 40 de dolari. Deci din 1000 am pierdut 40. Adica un risc de 4%, pe care l-am "obtinut" cu un leverage curent de 10 la 1. Asta vreti? Daca aveam un leverage curent de doua ori mai mare, riscul ar fi fost (la aceeasi marime a stopului) de 8%. Pai cum facem cu money managementul nene? Nu ne-a fost vorba ca stam sub 2%? In acest caz, ori punem stopul la 20 de pipsi (ridicol de mic, o sa dam in stop de fiecare data si o sa pierdem sigur!) ori scadem loturile la jumatate. Adica tranzactionam doar 5k (presupunand ca ni se permite lot oricat de mic). Daca am fi tranzactionat 5k, pentru a sta in marja de risk de 2% si a ne permite sa folosim acelasi stop, de 40 de pipsi, atunci leverage-ul curent ar fi fost de 5000/1000, adica 5:1!!!!!! Si am fi pus margine de 5000/200=25 de parai, si am fi ramas cu 975 de parai liberi, cifre care sunt acum mult mai bune! Desigur, profitul ar fi fost la jumatate, in caz de profit, dar si pierderea ar fi fost la jumatate, in caz de pierdere. Pentru al doilea exemplu de mai sus, lucrurile stau "infinit mai nasol"!! Aici avem deschise doua tranzactii, una de 10k si ulterior alta de 20k, suntem "in cărţi" cu un leverage curent de 30 la 1, pentru ca avem doar 1000 de parai in cont, dar manipulam 10+20=30 de mii de parai. Fiecare pip ne aduce un profit ori o pierdere de 3 parai. Daca am pus stopuri la 40 de pipsi, ca mai sus, atunci avem un risc de 120 de parai, din cei 1000 pe care ii avem. Deci am riscat 12%! Ridicol de mult! Doar de dragul faptului de a avea un leverage de 30 la 1?? Ar trebui sa fiu ori inconstient ori idiot. Sa zicem ca tranzactionam EUR/USD, unde o miscare de 0.5 procente zilnic inseamna cam 70 de pipsi, motiv pentru care avem un SL de 80 de pipsi si am intrat cu un leverage curent de 50 la 1, deoarece brokerul "permite" 200 la 1, asta inseamna ca avem 0.5 loturi deschise in total si luam/dam 5 parai pe pip. Daca dam in stop, tocmai am pierdut 5*80=400 de parai. Am riscat si am pierdut 40 la suta din cont dintr-un foc! Cate "focuri" la rand va puteti permite???? Daca sunteti scalper si tranzactionati cu stopuri foarte mici, o sa ziceti ca lucrurile stau altfel. De aia am si zis ca un scalper are nevoie de "leverage maxim admis" ceva mai mare. Dar in realitate, tranzactii multe cu stopuri mici si loturi mari inseamna spread imens platit brokerului, adica tot moarte sigura, dar din alte cauze, care nu fac subiectul postului curent. De ce am zis ca leverage-ul maxim specificat de broker nu poate fi niciodata atins? Ia sa vedem. Presupunem ca - peste exemplele de mai sus - continuam sa adaugam tranzactii. Intai un lot, apoi inca 60 de mii. Avem deschise 0.1+0.2+1.0+0.6=1.9 loturi, deci suntem "leveraged" cu 190000/1000=190 la 1. Brokerul permite pana la 200 la 1. Pentru asta, am depus in margine 190000/200=950 de parai si mai avem liberi in "free margin" inca 50. Care este costul unui pip la asemenea tranzactie? Ati ghicit, 19 parai, pentru ca un pip este 0.0001 si avem 190000*0.0001 USD la fiecare pip care vine sau pleaca. Presupunem incontinuare ca spreadul este zero. In acest caz o miscare de 3 pipsi contra noastra ne va lua din cont 3*19=57 de parai, pe care NU ii avem. Pentru ca avem doar 50 liberi. De ceilalti nu ne putem atinge, ca ei sunt blocati in margine. Deci o miscare de NUMAI 3 pipsi contra noastra si suntem in MARGIN CALL, tranzactiile se inchid automat, ni se dau depozitele inapoi si avem in cont 943 de parai liberi ca pasarea cerului, dar restul de 57 i-am pierdut. In realitate, daca avem un spread de 2 pipsi (pe Euro de exemplu) atunci dupa deschiderea celor 1.9 loturi avem 950 de parai blocati in margine, 19*2=38 de parai blocati in spread (pierduti cu spreadul) si NUMAI!!!! 12 (doisprezece!) parai free. Deci o miscare de un singur pip contra ne duce la MARGIN CALL si am pierdut - la fel - 57 de parai, doar ca de data asta am pierdut 19 la pipul contra si 38 i-am platit brokerului pe spread. Iata deci ca pe un caz "ideal" nu ne putem permite sa "atingem" leverage-ul maxim admis de 200:1, deja la 190:1 nu ne putem permite nici macar UN PIP impotriva. Daca spreadul este de 3 pips, nici macar la leverage-ul de 190:1 nu putem ajunge, trebuie sa ne oprim pe la 185:1, unde deja nu mai avem margine libera pentru a mai putea pune tranzactii. Cifrele pe care le specifica brokerul ca "leverage de XX:1" reprezinta un leverage "maxim permis", nu acela la care tranzactionam de obicei. Aceste cifre sunt "fantomatice", ele nu pot fi atinse niciodata in viata reala, decat daca vreti cu tot dinadinsul sa pierdeti niste bani si nu stiti cum. Aruncati-i direct de pe balcon, e mai simplu. Aceste cifre nu sunt folosite - in mod direct - la nimic altceva decat la calculul marginii pe care trebuie sa o depuneti atunci cand deschideti o tranzactie. Ele nu reprezinta NIMIC pentru traderul care respecta money management. Hai sa facem un pic de mate , stiu ca va place. Daca vreti sa stati in riscul de (sa zicem) 3% specificat de MM (nu am luat 2% din ratiuni de calcule, mai jos se obtinea un 200 si nu am vrut sa se confunde cu leverage-ul, dar personal recomand un risc maxim de 1-2%!!!) atunci leverage-ul este ultimul lucru la care trebuie sa va ganditi. Daca deschideti o tranzactie cu stop de P pips, atunci ati riscat pe ea P*L*10, unde L este numarul de loturi jucat, iar 10 vine de la faptul ca pentru un lot intreg tranzactionat aveti 10 dolari pe pip riscati. Ca sa il faceti in dolari (unitati, cum zice Marco mai sus) trebuie sa puneti in ecuatie marimea lotului standard, adica avem P*D*10/S, unde D este suma in dolari jucata, iar S este 100k. Daca puneti conditia ca acest risc sa fie mai mic decat 3% din suma din cont (balanta), atunci aveti P*D/10k<3*B/100, (a se citi "mai mic sau egal", nu am mai pus egalul ca sa nu complic), de unde scoatem pe D, ca fiind D<3*10000*B/(P*100), adica D<300*B/P. Aceasta este suma MAXIMA pe care o putem tranzactiona, in functie de stop-loss-ul pus, pentru a sta in marja de risc permisa de MM. Deci de cate ori mai mult decat balanta putem tranzactiona? Leverage-ul reprezinta "de cate ori mai multi bani decat avem ni se permite sa manipulam". Adica daca avem 3 lei si leverage-ul este de 74:1, atunci ni se permite sa manipulam 74*3=222 de lei. Daca avem B lei in balanta, dar ni se permite (de catre regula de MM) sa manipulam D lei, atunci leverage-ul permis de MM este de D/B. Vom nota acest leverage cu V (ca sa nu confundam cu L, care erau loturi). Deci V=D/B, si substituim pe D, rezulta V<(300*B/P)/B, adica V<300/P, pentru ca D<...ce era acolo.. Adica pur si simplu zis: leverage-ul permis de un MM (agresiv!) de 3% risc, este de cel mult 300/P, unde P este stopul ales. Daca am un MM normal cu 2% risc maxim, atunci V<200/P. Daca am un MM "prudent" cu 1.5% risc maxim, atunci V<150/P, iar pt 1% risc maxim, V<100/P. Sa zicem ca avem un MM normal, care ne permite sa riscam cel mult 2% din cont pe tranzactie. Atunci V<200/P. Ce inseamna asta? Inseamna ca daca avem un stop-loss de 25 de pipsi, determinat de pe grafic, atunci leverage-ul maxim pe care ne permitem sa il folosim este V<200/25, adica 8:1. OPT!!!!! Intr-adevar, daca am 1000 de dolari in cont, pot deschide o tranzactie de cel mult 8000 de parai (0.08 loturi) pe care risc 25 de pipsi la stop-loss, adica 0.08*10*25=20 de parai, adica am riscat 20 de parai din 1000, adica cei 2% permisi de MM. Chiar si la combinatii de 3-4 biduri, care permit un risc mai mare, sa zicem de 10% (absurd de mare!), pe o combinatie de stopuri medie, sa zicem 50 de pipsi (absurd de mica!), am V<1000/50, adica nu imi pot permite un leverage mai mare de 20 la 1. Concluzie: Leverage-ul este limitat de regulile de money management, nu de broker! De aceea pentru mine, cand aud intrebari de genul "am doi brokeri, unu ofera 50:1 leverage, altul 200:1, pe care sa il aleg", imi suna la fel ca intrebarile puse de altii prin alte posturi: "care este mai usor de facut, profit de 50% pe luna, sau de 1% pe zi?".... Cum au zis si altii mai sus, leverage-ul MAXIM permis de broker (cifrele alea fantasmagorice de 50 la 1 sau de 200 la 1, sau chiar de 400, grrrr!!!! la 1, la care nu veti putea ajunge niciodata) ar trebui sa fie ultimul lucru care sa va intereseze. Daca respectati MM, nu veti ajunge niciodata la ele. Ele sunt folosite in mod direct, DOAR la calculul marginii pe care o depuneti cand deschideti o tranzactie. Atat. In rest, sunt doar niste cifre. Am zis la inceput "in mod direct" (si am repetat in paragraful anterior), pentru ca in realitate exista o influenta "indirecta". Dar aceasta nu ne afecteaza pe noi ca traderi incepatori, ci doar pe acei.... "quants" geniali care pun combinatii de zeci de biduri pe zeci de perechi/instrumente in acelasi timp (cum ar fi unii arbitratori). Influenta indirecta este aceea ca un "leverage-maxim-admis-de-broker" mai mare inseamna mai putini bani blocati in margine, deci mai multi bani liberi pentru a fi folositi in combinatii de biduri. Daca deschideti cate 50 de ordere in acelasi timp, si daca va permiteti un risc total de 20% din cont pe combinatie (complet idiotenie, dar mai stii ce metode complexe si... sigure mai inventeza unii??), atunci este avantajos sa aveti un leverage-maxim-permis cat mai mare, pentru a avea mai putini bani blocati in margine, deci mai multi bani liberi pentru.....super-combinatie . Dar daca nu ati deschis niciodata in viata voastra (pe bani reali!) mai mult de 10 tranzactii in acelasi timp, si vreti in plus si sa respectati MM.... atunci credeti-ma pe cuvant ca NU AVETI NEVOIE de un leverage curent mai mare de 10 la 1. Zece la unu! Ca brokerul zice leverage maxim de 57 la 1 sau de 432 la 1, ar trebui sa va doara in spate, sa fie pe ultimul loc in lista prioritatilor dupa care va alegeti brokerul. Leverage-ul este o sabie cu doua taisuri. Un V mare creste liniar sansele de a castiga mai mult, dar el tot-odata creste exponential sansele de a pierde mai mult. Pentru ca pe muchia cutitului, cand tranzactionati aproape de leverage-ul maxim, posibilitatile se ingusteaza imens. Cresc sansele de margin call, scade intervalul de pipsi cu care puteti permite pietei sa sa miste impotriva voastra, etc. Leverage-ul curent mare (apropiat de leverage-ul maxim permis de broker) este cale sigura spre auto-distrugere. Si ca sa raspund si la intrebarea lui Marco: Presupunand ca unitatea este aceeasi (adica nu vorbesti de loturi mini la ibfx si loturi standard la fxcm, ori loturi de un milion la fxclub, ci doar de dolari, ca unitate), adica tranzactionezi 1000 de dolari la marketiva pe XXX/USD si 1000 de dolari la oanda pe XXX/USD, atunci la ambele tranzactii valoarea unui pip este de 10 centi, ea nu depinde in nici un fel de leverage, si se calculeaza foarte simplu, numarul de unitati tranzactionate, ori valoarea pipului pe unitate. Adica ai 1000 de dolari, ori 0.0001, pentru ca aceasta este valoarea unui pip la perechea XXX/USD, oricare ar fi XXX. In aceste conditii, daca ai la marketiva 500 de dolari in cont, si la oanda 1000 de dolari in cont, leverage-ul tau curent este de 1:1 la oanda si de 2:1 la marketiva, adica la marketiva ai tranzactionat de 2 ori mai multi bani decat ai in cont, si ti s-a permis asta pentru ca leverage-ul lor maxim este (in exemplul tau) de 100:1. Nici unu dintre aceste aspecte legate de leverage nu are nimic de-a face cu valoarea pipului pe tranzactie. Valoarea pipului pe tranzactie este numarul de unitati tranzactionate, inmultit cu valoarea pipului pe unitate. Atentie, la prima vedere o sa para ca zic prostii, pentru ca valoarea pipului se calculeaza la tail currency, pe cand tu faci tranzactia la base currency. Ca sa fiu mai clar: Exemplul 1: Ai 500 de dolari in cont la un broker cu leverage de 100 la 1. Asta inseamna ca poti "manipula" o suma in dolari egala cu 500*100=50 de mii de dolari. Asta e MAXIMUL. Dar tu nu esti tampit sa cumperi 50 de mii de dolari dintr-un foc, ci incepi "incetisor", cu 1000 de dolari. Cursul EURUSD este in acest moment de 1.5000 (apropiat de cel real din momentul postarii, l-am rotunjit doar, pt usurarea calculelor). Cumperi 1000 EURUSD la primul click. 1. Cat este leverage-ul curent? 2. Cat este marginea depusa? 3. Cat ti-a ramas free? 4. Cat este valoarea pipului? O sa zici ca leverage-ul curent este de 2:1, pentru ca ai cumparat 1000 si ai in cont doar 500, dar nu este adevarat. Pentru ca tu cumperi EURO platind pentru ei in dolari. Deci ai cumparat 1000 de euro, platind pentru ei 1500 de dolari. Adica ai "manipulat" 1500 de dolari, desi tu ai in cont doar 500. In acest caz leverage-ul curent este de 3:1, tu ai manipulat de 3 ori mai multi dolari decat ai in cont, iar un broker serios o sa iti "dea deoparte" (blocheze) o margine de 15 dolari pt privilegiul pe care ti-l acorda, acela de a tranzactiona mai multi bani decat ai. Cei 15 sunt calculati foarte simplu, marimea tranzactiei supra leverage-ul maxim permis, la fel ca in exemplele de mai sus. Adica 1500/100=15. Are legatura cu cat ai tranzactionat, si cu leverage-ul maxim specificat, de 100:1, iar nu cu leverage-ul curent, care este 3:1. Deci ti-a ramas free suma de 485 pe care o poti folosi sa pui alte biduri. Cei 15 parai sunt blocati si nu te poti atinge de ei (nu mai sunt ai tai) pana nu inchizi tranzactia, cand iti vor fi inapoiati. Alti brokeri, ca IBFX spre exemplu, iti vor bloca intre 20 si 30 de parai ca margine, ceea ce este cumva eronat, dar acolo calculele sunt diferite, deoarece primesti MARGIN CALL cand marginea blocata scade la mai putin de jumate din suma blocata initial, deci te poti atinge de banii blocati, poti "cheltui" jumatate din ei pe miscarea pietei, dar nu pe pus biduri noi. Ceea ce inseamna de fapt ca marginea reala este de 10-15 parai, dar ei retin dublu (unii brokeri chiar triplu) pentru a te impiedica sa pui biduri incontinuu ca rumburaku'. Tu poti pune biduri noi doar daca ai bani "liberi" cu care sa acoperi marginea noilor biduri. Blocand de doua ori mai multi bani, brokerul face ca suma banilor "liberi" sa scada de 2 ori mai repede, si nu vei mai avea bani de biduri noi, impiedicandu-te sa joci "in nestire", si in acelasi timp asigurandu-te si de faptul ca bidurile vechi au cel putin 50% "interval de miscare" - pana cand marginea depusa se injumatateste - asta este un alt mod de protectie a clientului, care lucreaza tot in avantajul tau, pentru ca nu vei fi dat afara din tranzactie la cea mai mica tremuratura a pietei, in cazul in care ai "supralicitat" si te-ai intins mai mult decat te tine plapuma. In plus, retinand de 2 ori mai multi bani in margine, brokerul se protejeaza SI pe el insusi: are de unde sa te curete de bani in cazul in care piata face un salt brusc si foarte mare in defavoarea ta, pentru ca... are de unde, hihi, ai depus la el un depozit de 2 ori mai mare, poate sa sara piata cat vrea, el nu iese in pierdere. Bun, ce a ramas? aaa, valoarea pipului. Pai asta nu are legatura cu leverage-ul maxim admis de broker. Cursul este de 1.5000 si tu ai platit 1500 de parai ca sa cumperi 1000 de euro. Daca cursul se misca un pip in sus, adica devine 1.5001, atunci tu poti vinde cei 1000 de euro si cumperi cu ei 1500.1 dolari, deci ai castigat 10 centi. Valoarea pipului tau este 10 centi. Atat castigi sau pierzi, ori de cate ori se misca piata in favoarea sau defavoarea ta, la fiecare pip - 10 centi. Daca ai fi deschis tranzactie cu 10 mii, atunci castigai/pierdeai un dolar la fiecare pip. Si ai fi avut leverage curent de 30:1. Si asa mai departe. Daca unu ar fi fost foarte lacom, sau complet idiot sa deschida bid de 33 de mii de EURUSD, el ar fi manipulat in acest caz 33*1.5=49.5 mii de parai, si ar fi fost "leveraged" de 49500/500 ori, adica 99:1 current leverage. Perfect posibil, deoarece max leverage specificat de broker e 100:1. In cazul asta el ar fi trebuit sa depuna margine de 495 de parai si ar fi avut "liberi" in cont doar 5 parai. Prima adiere de vant (doi pipsi in contra lui, presupunand ca spreadul era zero) si era pe tusa. Daca spreadul era de 1 pip, atunci doar un pip in contra lui era de ajuns pt margin call. Daca spreadul era de 2 pipsi, nici macar nu putea pune o tranzactie asa de mare, ca nu ii ajungeau banii de margine!!! In oricare dintre cazuri (presupunand ca brokerul inchidea ochii si nu il dadea afara) valoarea pipului sau ar fi fost 3.3$, pentru ca a tranzactionat 0.33 loturi. Exemplul 2: La acelasi broker cumperi 1000 de GBP/USD, deci ai luat 1000 de lire, pentru care platesti 2000 de dolari, pentru ca cursul momentan este 2.0000 (din nou curs fictiv, dar aproape de cel real, pentru a usura calculele). Ai leverage curent de 4:1, pentru ca ai in cont 500 si ai manipulat 2000. Atata vreme cat e mai mic decat maximul permis, adica 100:1, este in ordine, poti continua sa pui biduri noi, depinde cat sange ai in... vene, si cat de inconstient esti. Brokerul iti permite sa fii inconstient in proportie de 100 la 1 . Pentru acest bid deja deschis trebuie sa depui margine de 20 de parai. In conformitate cu discutia de la primul exemplu, alti brokeri pot lua orice margine intre 10 si 50 de parai, chiar daca specifica clar ca leverage-ul este de 100 la 1, dar corect este 20 de parai. Unii calculeaza "numeric" adica ai luat 1000 de g/u, platesti margine la "numarul" 1000, uitand sa faca conversia la dolari. Adica pui margine $10. La acest tip de brokeri leverage-ul maxim real depinde de perechea pe care o tranzactionezi. Adica ei zic ca leverage-ul maxim este de 100:1, dar daca tranzactionezi E/U te poti duce pana la 150:1, daca tranzactionezi G/U te poti duce pana la 200:1, etc. La E/G nu poti depasi 60:1 iar la G/F maximul e aproape triplu. Se poate verifica foarte usor ce fel de broker aveti, deschideti o tranzactie pe E/U de x unitati, si vedeti cat e marginea, apoi inchideti si deschideti alta pe G/U, tot de x unitati. Daca marginea blocata este la fel ca la E/U, atunci aveti un broker care calculeaza marginea "numeric", adica amesteca merele cu perele. Eu nu as avea incredere in astfel de brokeri. Marketiva era asa la inceput, acum nu stiu cum o mai fi. Well, deci ai depus margine 20 de parai, ti-a ramas free pt tranzactii noi 480. Care e valoarea pipului? Daca cursul devine 2.0001, tu ai 1000 de lire pe care ai dat 2000 de dolari. Daca le vinzi, iei pe ele 2000.1 dolari, deci din nou ai castigat 10 centi. Deci 10 centi pe pip. Exemplu 3: La alt broker cu leverage de 50:1 ai aceiasi bani in cont, 500 de parai. De data asta suma maxima pe care o poti tranzactiona este (conform cu noul leverage) de 500*50, adica 25 de mii. Dar tu nu vrei asa departe, ci vrei tot 1000 de euro. Si o sa ai tot 10 centi pe pip miscare. Ceea ce difera este marginea, de data asta e dubla, adica pui 30 de parai jos, si nu 15. Si iti raman liberi 470 pt tranzactii noi. si nu 485 ca mai sus. Cat este leverage-ul real? Desigur, ai manipulat tot 1500 de parai, ca la exemplu 1, si pt faptul ca ai doar 500 in cont, tot de 3 ori mai mult ai manipulat. Deci leverage-ul real, favorul pe care ti l-a facut banca/brokerul, este tot de 3:1. Cu atatia bani te-au imprumutat ei ca sa poti tranzactiona, si de aia a trebuit sa lasi un depozit (margine) de buna credinta. Daca vei continua sa adaugi tranzactii, pana aproape de cele 25 de mii permise, vei bloca in margine mult mai repede banii ramasi, decat in cazul in care leverage-ul ar fi fost 100:1, asta e singura diferenta. Dar cu ce MM vei tranzactiona atunci? cu ce risc? cati pipsi in contra iti vei permite? Sa te fereasca sfantul sa dai ochii cu mine dupa aia, ca sa vezi ce iti fac eu legat de money managementu ala.... Exemplul 4 este tema pt acasa, cumperi 1000 de G/U la cel de al doilea broker. Desigur, valoarea pipului va fi tot de 10 centi, precum si leverage-ul curent va fi exact acelasi ca in exemplul 2. Dar difera sumele depozitate, si banii ramasi liberi. Si vei putea deschide mai putine biduri simultan, decat in cazul cu leverage maxim admis de 100:1, pentru ca banii ne-blocati se vor termina mai iute. Dar chiar ai nevoie de 25 de biduri de 1000 deschise simultan??? grrrr Concluzie: atentie la relatia "base currency - tail currency", voi cumparati/vindeti moneda de baza, platind ori incasand pentru ea moneda de referinta. Daca cursul E/U este de 1.3, asta inseamna ca pentru un euro (care este marfa pe care o vindeti sau cumparati) platiti ori incasati 1.3 dolari (care este moneda cu care cumparati marfa, ori cu care vindeti marfa, moneda de referinta). Cand tranzactionati xxxx EURUSD, atunci ati tranzactionat xxxx EUR, pentru care ati platit (manipulat din cont) de 1.3 ori mai multi USD. Este normal ca leverage-ul curent si marginea sa se calculeze la suma manipulata, de aia blocati in margine mai multi bani cand cumparati un lot de GBP si mai putini cand cumparati un lot de AUD, pentru ca in realitate folositi mai multi USD in primul caz, si mai putini in al doilea. Pe cand pipsii se misca in moneda de referinta. Adica in USD in cazul nostru. Ar trebui sa mai dau cateva exemple si cu cross-uri, ori cand USD este base currency, pentru ca acolo lucrurile stau un pic diferit, si sunt mai complicate. Dar daca exista interes, o sa mai revin dupa anul nou. Pe cine doare tare, sa caute pe babypips, erau cateva exemple cu crosuri la calcule (cred ca si ibfx-university are cateva exemple, acolo unde vorbesc de calculul pipsilor si de margine). De maine sunt in vacanta pana pe 3, nu cred ca mai dau pe aici, sa vad insa ce planuri are doamna tradelover si domnisoara tradelover aia mica... ca ele fac programarea timpului pt vacante.... Hai sarbatori fericite si spor la pipsuiala in noul an, la toata lumea.

Multumim fain de tot Scrat ! Multa fericire si sanatate maxima, precum si o caruta de pipsi tuturor in noul an! Un Craciun nemaipomenit tutror acelora care il sarbatoresc! La multi ani! P.S. Poate trimiteti si la mine niste zapada, egoistilor! O pastrati toata pt voi....

Raspunsul e simplu: norocul, in primul rand. Daca o sa te uiti la equityul lui, ala aratat in mt4, nu ala de pe site care e foarte grosier, o sa vezi ca are o perioada constanta, de aproape 6 saptamani (jumatate din perioada de concurs totala) in care nu s-a remarcat cu nimic, apoi piata se misca convenabil in directia lui si reuseste sa faca un salde de la 15-20 de mii la 100 de mii in doar doua saptamani, o crestere brusca si fara suport practic, la riscul asta se putea sa fie invers. Dupa care urmeaza alte 3-4 saptamani de see-saw si tremuraturi. Daca concursul ar mai continua cateva luni ai vedea si caderea Toti cei care au fost anul trecut in primele 50 de locuri si care participa la concurs si anul acesta, sunt la coada clasamentului, dincolo de locurile 500, cu doar cateva sute de parai in cont. La fel cam toti cei care au ocupat temporar primele locuri anul acesta, cu echitati fabuloase, dar au fost mai putin norocosi ca Better, si piata a ales mai devreme sa se miste impotriva lor. Exemple: - Rich (castigatorul celor 40 de mii de parai anul trecu, si un foarte bun programator) este pe locul 553 cu 413 lei in cont, - void11 - locul 601 cu 72 de parai in cont - zrn "stop loss is not important", se afla pe 574 cu 201 parai - fess pe 562 cu 300 de parai, - zona (preferatul meu) pe 547 cu 445 parai - fighter, 536, cu 547 parai - free-day, pe locul 21 anul trecut si pe locurile 6-8 in primele saptamani ale acestui campionat, a ramas la ora actuala cu 100 de parai si daca nu ar fi fost descalificat ii pierdea si pe aia (locul 594) - trohoang, canadezul care reusise sa il ia pe winwin in primele zile, pe locul 529 cu 698 de parai in cont - axelforex (mamaaa ce valva a facut in mijlocul campionatului, reusind sa bata primul record la vremea aia, si ce tare se dadea la interviul ala) este pe locul 521 cu $861 in cont. Perioada de inceput a balantei lui, aia in care equity urca nebuneste, seamana leit cu perioada din ultimele saptamani pe graficul lui Better. Dupa care la alex (axelforex) a urmat cadereaaaa.... oaia cum cadeaaaaa... un zgomot faceaaaa... baaaam, baaaam, baaaam, ... Ada Milea sa traiasca... - paul brodar, care programeaza experti pe bani (nu strategii proprii, ci strategia clientului, la fel ca codersguru), vine anul acesta cu o metoda de portofolio trading (multicurrency, corelatii) pe care o si ofera pt download (e interesanta, o puteti aduce) si cu rezultate uimitoare de backtest, dar din pacate in real time nu reuseste decat locul 508 cu doar 1001 de parai - indonezianul munir ajunge de pe primele locuri pana pe locul 492 cu 1200 de parai - prietenul nostru codersguru cu metoda lui bazata pe news (?!?!) vine pe 480, cu doar $1370 ramasi, si probabil ca daca ar mai continua concursul, i-ar pierde si pe aia - sashken pe 462 ($1570) - theBeginner, 445 ($1837) - "marele" steinitz mai trage cu greu de cei 4000 de parai ramasi (pe langa tot ce am zis pana acuma despre el, asta in plus e dobitoc-dobitoc, maniac, si schizofrenic pe deasupra, daca va uitati pe treadul lui de discutii o sa vedeti de ce, idiotul a postat de 1000 de ori prin diverse treaduri de discutii un acelasi mesaj, in care ii face dobitoci pe aia care il critica si zice sa mergeti la el pe pagina de web sa va explice el "ce si cum" si de ce nu merge expertul lui, adica de ce pierde la concurs, cand de fapt nu pierde, ci castiga pe conturile reale, ma intreb daca el chiar a jucat vreodata cu bani reali, si daca a facut vreodata profit) - ldamiani (care a luat anul trecut cele 25 de mii) se zbate si el pe la 6000, daca concursul ar tine inca cateva luni, ar fi unul pe care as paria, dar asa... nu mai are timp sa spere la vro ceva malai - matt brown (matmosferic) reuseste dupa o crestere la 23 de mii de parai sa faca o scadere la 5000 - solandr ajunge de pe locul 25 anul trecut pe locul 350 anul asta (in jur de $4000 ramasi) si asa mai departe, lista celor cu peste 10 mii de parai in cont se reduce pe zi ce trece. Acum mai sunt doar vo 6 pagini (adica 89 de concurenti) care sunt "profitabili" si daca concursul ar mai tine cateva luni vor ramane patru pagini, apoi trei, apoi doua... Adica 30 de concurenti din 600, exact procentul ala de 5% care nu sunt intre cei 95% , iar cei care ar ramane ar fi profitabili un timp foarte lung, dar in cele din urma, vor pierde si ei, pentru ca expertii mai trebuie ajustati din cand in cand. Alta ar fi situatia daca s-ar da voie la modificarea expertilor. Eu as face ceva de genul "poti modifica expertul de cate ori vrei tu, si poti sa il trimiti incepand cu sambata si terminand cu vinerea urmatoare, si va intra in concurs lunea urmatoare (de dupa vineri), substituindu-l pe cel vechi". Daca nu are erori, etc. Si as tine concursul indefinit, as da premii (mai mici) la fiecare 3 luni, sau la fiecare 6 luni, un an, etc, celor care rezista, si celor care se claseaza pe primele locuri, ar fi mult mai aproape de realitate, si mai bine. Si as avea si mai multi clienti la program (MT4), hihi. Daca as fi Mq, dar nu sunt... Printre cei care au fost pe podium si se afla sub 10k acum (dar inca mai au sanse de revenire, daca risca tot in ultimele zile si au noroc) se afla valvk, cu 9 mii si ceva in cont. Daca baga in penultima zi o tranzactie de 8 loturi (doua ordere) atunci pune margine de 8000 si ii mai raman il cont aprox 2000 pentru a acoperi o "umbra" a candelei pe directie contrara de aproximativ 23 de pipsi, depinzand de perehea pe care o alege (trendul cel mai puternic) are sanse de 70% ca umbra sa fie mai scurta de 23 de pipsi (e joi) si are sanse de 50% ca miscarea sa fie in directia lui. Deci in total 70*50/100*100=35% sanse sa fie pe directie si umbra sa fie scurta joi. In cazul care candela are vineri un close mai lung de 375 de pipsi (pe daily este foarte posibil, in doua zile, plus ca apar pre-releasurile de sfarsit de an, vine craciunul) atunci poate termina cu un equity de 39 de mii si are inca sanse la podium. In aceeasi situatie e si hendrick, care s-a clasat foarte bine anul trecut (autorul phoenix-ului), el se afla pe locul 103 cu 9700 de parai. Altii mai "norocosi" au coborat de pe podium, dar au reusit inca sa se mentina peste 10k, adica deocamdata stau intre "profitabili". Cum ar fi lf8749 (locul 78 cu $10500) sau waddahattar (locul 39 cu $14500) care daca ar mai continua concursul ar sta intre profitabili incontinuare. Nu la fel este MiltonWaddams, care pur si simplu a urcat pe locul 1 accidental, expertul lui a deschis trei biduri pe usd/cad la inceputul competitiei, care s-au nimerit sa fie pe directie pt o perioada lunga, ajutandu-l sa doboare recordul de 55 de mii equity. Din pacate trendul s-a inversat, iar expertul lui nu a fost capabil sa inchida bidurile, ramanand cu balanta de 16 mii, si nici nu a mai fost capabil sa joace altceva de atunci incolo. Milton se afla la ora actuala pe locul 32 si probabil ca daca concursul ar mai continua, ori nu ar mai juca nimic, ori ar pierde. El a mers pur si simplu pe cei 50% "creste sau scade" u/cad-ul, pentru ca trendul era foarte smooth si daca s-ar fi inversat cat mai tarziu, ar fi facut profit cat mai mare, nu cred ca are altceva in expertul ala, in afara de "deschide trei sell-uri pe u/c si asteapta pana la sfarsitul competitiei, sa vedem ce iese". Draz nu reuseste nici el sa securizeze cele 40 de mii, si iese pe final cu pierdere, situindu-se pe locul 25 cu $18600, la fel si mmayson care coboara de la 30 de mii la 17 mii si se afla pe locul 29. Astia cu peste 10 mii, deja e prea riscant sa joci "totul pe o carte" la final, atata vreme cat nu stii ce au facut ceilalti (expertul tau nu stie ce sume au ceilalti, poate nu are nici unul peste 17 mii, si e pacat sa riste, daca erai pe primul loc si ai pierdut in ultima zi, iti dai palme ca ai implementat asa ceva!) Atat draz cat si mmayson au rapoarte foarte bune, (MAE, MFE, etc) ceea ce ma face sa cred ca expertii lor sunt profitabili pe termen lung, cu un factor de risc corespunzator. Dupa cum arata balance graph, la amandoi ar trebui sa urmeze o crestere pe urmatoarele luni. Pacat ca concursul asta nu tine mai mult , atunci se alegea graul de neghina. Si am ajuns si pe prima pagina, de pe care cel mai bun report mi se pare al lui wackena. Wackena s-a clasat foarte bine, tranzactioneaza foarte bine, si pe deasupra produce si spatule vaginale :) Anul acesta norocosii sunt (pana in prezent) Better, admadinata si wackena. Dar cu doar o mica schimbare a pietei, norocosii puteau sa fie oricare dintre cei enumerati in ultimele 2-3 fragmente de mai sus, precum si orcare altul care se afla acum in primele pagini. La factorii astia de risc, nu se poate vorbi de altceva decat de noroc. Better are o sansa in plus, dupa saptamana "norocoasa" cu cresterea de 80 de mii de parai, practic riscul lui s-a redus la mai putin de o treime, chiar jucand cu 15 loturi (maximul admis, de 3 ordere a cate 5 loturi). Adica poate juca mult mai lejer, are avantaj imens fata de ceilalti jucatori, si probabil ca tot ar avea sanse de castig (la banii astia) chiar daca concursul ar mai tine 1-2 luni, tot intre primii ar termina. Dar pe termen de (inca) 3-6 luni nu ii dau pre multe sanse in fata unuia ca wackena sau chiar (de ce nu??) ldamiani sau Hendrick (anul trecut clasat locul 5) ori valvk (locul 4 anul trecut, anul acesta pe locul 126 cu 9100 in cont, doar "cativa centi" le-au lipsit astora doi pana la premiu, iar anul asta s-au mentinut destul de bine, deci oamenii "are metoda potrivita"). Better a avut noroc o saptamana. Atat. Putea fi oricare altul. Daca va participa si anul viitor, pot sa pariez ca o sa pateasca la fel ca Rich.

That is a very good link, and the articles inside are also very good! Thanks for them! I recommend to anyone to read the articles and download the tools from codebase (mentioned inside). There are also a lot of explanations about how the ST is working. Compared with my own tool, there are advantages and disadvantages. My tool is easier to use and faster, and allows changing the parameters to any values, directly on the graphic. The other one uses few predefined values, and if you want to change them to other (not in the list) then you have to edit the source file, change the list and recompile (obviously, you have to restart the tester for that, and start everything from the beginning). The author is using the same concept of dragging text on the screen, however his tool is intended to be used with ST ONLY! I mean that you can not use it in real time, when a tick can come during you are dragging the texts, and you can end by having an unwanted order, at an unwanted opening price. This is even heavier, as you have different buttons for different order types (limit orders, stop orders, etc) and you have to decide every time what to use, you can not really concentrate on the graphic. My tool is automatically detecting the order type, according with the level of the price, and you can not make mistakes, therefore trading is much faster. You can even trade with the ST at the maximum speed, and you won't miss orders, nor have unwanted opening prices. There is also a issue about "pairing" the Lots/SL/Risk. Because if you chose the Lots and SL, then you have a determined risk, that is Lots*SLpips*10 (for standard lot you risk 10 bucks per pip) and also if you chose the risk and lots, you will have a determined SL which is not "graphical oriented", it results from the risk calculus and not from the tops/deeps or major lines/pivots of the chart. With the tool from codebase you can select any 2 of the 3 parameters of the equation, and the third will be computed from the other 2 selected. That's why the SL's won't really be chart-connected, but risk (or lot) - connected. On the other side, the tool from codebase is much more complex, it includes the features to move the pending orders too (you can not do that with my tool, you have to close the old pending and place a new one), and it has a very elaborated algorithm to automatically move the stops (kind of more complex trailing stop function). Moving the stops automatically (as trailing stop), moving the pending orders, and also extending the pending orders time are few of the drawbacks of my tool. In fact, extending the pending orders is not possible with the tools from codebase too, but this is not a problem, as you can create any time a new pending order. Another advantage of CB tool is that you can place complex order combinations in the same time. For my tool it is possible to place maximum 2 orders at one tick (one buy and one sell). If you want to place more orders, you must do it on different ticks. However, I can close all orders with only one click, if the situation turns wrong, what the tool from CB can not do. As I said, advantages, and disadvantages. I highly recommend the tool from codebase to meticulous traders, and especially to the guys having a "set it and forget it" trading strategy. Trailing stops are REALLY useful in this case, and can improve a lot your profit. The tool from codebase also comes with 2 indicators that give information about active and inactive orders, balance, equity, and many other, but what I like most is that the tool use a visual library I did not know it before. It is called VisualTestingTools.mq4 and must be copied in the "\experts\include" folder. This library contains nice graphical functions, what a pity I did not have that library before starting to make my tool... Well done for the guy who made it, and thanks again for the link. P.S. I will try to improve my tool, by "stealing" few ideas from the other one, I already added to it few other features, as a rudimentary trailing stop and moving of the stop behind a chosen Moving Average (you can select the period and the number of pips and the SL will move wit the MA, staying behind of it with that number of pips). Other possible upgrades came to my mind now, after playing with the tool from CB. There will be a new version of my tool coming soon, more "professional" . Thanks again for feedback.

thanks for the appreciations here you also can choose the risk percentage, lot's size, or so. Please read again the post, and eventually, play a little bit with the toy. You will like it. I like especially the way you can move the stops and targets, by dragging the triangles anywhere on the chart, you can easily put them above the tops, or below the deeps, without making any calculus by hand. Additionally, you don't need any DLL or EXE, everything is done in pure MQL2. May I ask what is the name of the tool you talk about, and if he is also DLL free? If so, I am quite curious how the programmer solved few graphical issues (as reading the mouse, for example). Don't get me wrong, but I won't load ANY dll in my computer, as long as I play with real money... I still wait for the days when MetaQuotes would make the MT4 able to move the stops, targets and pending orders directly on the chart, by dragging the green/red dashed lines directly with the mouse. This could be just a very small programming effort for them... But it seems as they don't want to do it...

How many of ye' did paper trading? I mean to take a chart, print it, take a pencil, draw lines, make calculus, place trades, write them in the records... Then later on, print the continuation of the chart, compute profit/loss, see what went right/wrong? And write again the reflections in the diary... Not so many of ye', for sure. Some of ye' would say, c'mon! what the scuppering, we want easy money... Well, me' have bad news for ye'... if ye' never did paper trading, ye'll lose that easy money of ye'rs... All profitable traders made paper trading somewhere in their past, and few of them are doing it every day for few minutes, just to keep their blade sharp... Novadays, people do paper trading less and less. They use tutorials to learn trading and they dream about the huge profits they can make. Some people use tools like Strategy Tester to make "paper" trading, just because they have no programming knowledge to write their own expert, and they try to find or to refine their own strategy. These people are the lucky one, and I have a word fer' them: Respect! 'Coz in time they see hundreds of charts and situations and learn to hold the helm in all kind of seas. Generally, any folk having some basic programming knowledges will put few lines of a scrap strategy in an algorithm and set'her'sail with ST on the history chart. If the account is wiped, they change the program, add few variables, then do a lot of optimization. When the strategy is "working" and seems to bring some booty', they are fast to go live and invest some real coins into it. Well, the Big Shark on the Ocean laugh at them and they lose the peas. Few of them would try later on to sell the "expert" as a very sharp blade, but then ye buy it, ye'll find is a rag. This fellows will never learn to trade a chart, and they are born losers and will di' losers. This post is addressed to me' pirate fellows that like to do paper trading, using ST. Typical they open ST, use visual mode, add few indicators on the visual chart, use pause button, then navigate step by step with F12 key. When they find the right situation, they write down on the paper the entry, quantity of lots, stop loss, target, then they use F12 until even target or stop is hit. Of course, this is a wonderful way to learn! But you need to do a lot of calculus on the paper, beside of pressing F12 key and following the chart. You need to compute the profit/loss all the time, keep track of the stops (if your strategy involves any kind of trailing stop), watch the indicators, etc. This take a lot of time and make ye' concentrate on calculus, and NOT on the chart. To be able to learn, ye' must concentrate on the chart, and that is quite difficult when you have to do play with the pencil an the eraser for every punch of F12. Better ship could be to have an expert to keep tracking of all this stuff, and to open/close orders when YOU tell him, DURING testing. In this way, you can concentrate at price action. There are many ways to do that. One is to use dll's, and/or make an external program with few buttons, as "Buy", "Sell" etc. You run the program AND the expert in the same time, and when you press the button, the program can create a file with order's characteristics inside. Then the expert is reading the file and places the trade, moves the stops, etc. Your "start()" function could be in this case "read the file, place the trades, exit". This version maybe looks nice, but has two major disadvantages. One is that not everybody would like to use an .exe tool or a .dll without knowing what malicious code can be inside. And the second disadvantage - you can not trade directly on the graphic. Well, can we do it without .dll's and still being able to trade... graphically? MT4 does not offer any functions to read the mouse position or click from the start() function, or so. But we can create some objects on the screen and we can move them around. Then the expert can read the position of the objects, and their values or descriptions, and he can place the trades accordingly. That is what me' be' doing for a while. That is a sharp blade, mate, and I am going to share it with ye for free. You can use it for paper trading, or even in real time, to place your orders, to move the stops and targets directly on the graphic, and many other. Paper_Trader.mq4 I did not bother to scale it accordingly with the zoom, so you should use a convenient zoom (zoom 2) of the chart to see the text inside of the rectangle. Eventually you need to move a bit the "chart shift" flag to the left. Like this: In fact, zoom 3 is working too, but you have to move the "chart shift" much to the left, to see all the rectangle and the small triangles on the right of the screen. For zoom 0 or 1 the text is too big and overlapped, for zoom 4 and 5 the rectangle is too big and it will get lost to the right. Well, zoom 6 or more you can try, and if you can find how to do, tell me, as I know MT4 has a maximum zoom of 5 To trade, is quite easy. Mark the Buy, Sell, Close, Close All "buttons" (double click on them). Keep them marked, to be able to react fast. If ye' use the "Go!" button, mark it too. When you want to trade, just move one of the Buy/Sell "buttons" onto the chart. I mean onto the left side of the "chart shift" flag. You can use pause/F12 if you are in Strategy Tester. Please read the comments inside of the .mq4 source code, related to the Go! button. In fact you don't need that button, so you can set it hidden by changing the parameter of the EA to false. In paper trading with ST, you will never need the Go! button. In real time trading, you also won't need it, but you have to move the Buy/Sell in a "tricky" way, to avoid unwanted trading. First move them vertically, but keep them in the right side of "chart shift" flag (that appears on the upper side of the chart) until you reach the price level where you want to place the trade. Then drag straight to the left and drop it in the left side of the "chart shift" flag, anywhere on the chart. Keep the price level. This way you can avoid an unwanted order at a random price, that could happen if you are in real time and a tick is coming during you drag the Buy/Sell over the chart, because MT4 has no possibility to know if you already dropped the text or you are still dragging it. This way you can place market orders, limit orders, stop orders, etc. If you use a "Go!" button, the trade is not executed immediately, but only after you move the "Go!" button on the chart, too. This way you can make some nice setups before going to place the order effectively. Be careful to the "hot" point. Every "button" shows a hot point when you select it. That is the coordinate of the button, where the text is placed. The trades will be placed where the hot point is, not where you mouse pointer drops the text. For MT4 the text is written where the "anchor" is. And the anchor is the hot point. To close a trade, just move the "Close" text to the green opening line of the trade. Cautions: all trades in the hysteresis area will be closed. Read inside of the source code about hysteresis and why we need it. If you usually place many orders with opening price very close each-other, and you want to close them one by one, then better use a smaller hysteresis. And of course, you can close all orders in an emergency case, dropping the "Close All" wherever on the chart. This will close all trades immediately, independent of using the "Go!" button or not, and is intended, as I said, for an emergency situation. If you need to change the default SL, TP or Lots during testing with ST (paper trading) then you can do it directly by selecting and modifying the values inside of the rectangle. Be careful and change the values ("Text" properties) and not the name of the objects, otherwise the EA will lose the control over them (he recognize his own objects by name only, if you change the name, he will get headache ). This is a big feature, you won't need to restart the ST if your strategy requires changing the lots on the fly. During live trading, if you want to change the SL, TP, Lots (default values), then change them directly in the EA properties (click on smiley in the upper right corner). It is faster and more safe. In ST would not be possible to modify EA parameters without restarting the tester, that is why I included this "on the fly edit of the parameters" feature. If you select the values, they will not stay selected, as the "buttons" do. This is not a bug. Everything except the buttons are un-selected when a tick is coming or when you press F12, just to make the screen more clear. After you have placed a trade, supposing you selected a SL and TP that are not zero, you will see some red/green triangles on the right side of the big rectangle, situated on the SL/TP lines. SL's are red, TP's are green by default, but you can change all the colors if you like. Well, what about them? Geeeeezzzzz! You can move the stops and the target directly by dragging these small triangles anywhere on the chart. Wooohooaaaa! Nice huh? That is the best tool you will ever get for free! Why I am giving it away? Well... I am a bit ashamed to tell you Doing paper trading is not easy. Following some discussions with friends from this forum about paper trading, I told them that doing paper trading is not easy. If you can not succeed in paper trading, there is no way that you can succeed in real time. I am an experienced trader. Well... Not a good one, but an experienced one because I was trading for few years already. I know the movement of the Euro by heart. Well, not every spike, but I know when the historical minimums and maximums were, what their values were, which year/month has a rising trend in the past, and in which month the price dropped as a stone... Well, do you think that I make paper-millions if I do paper trading for the last years, huh? Wrong. I was opening the ST in visual mode few days ago, and, to avoid any "bad influence" from my brain, I was hiding the prices and the time line. I just used the non-maximized window for the visual chart, and I moved it on the screen to the right until the price was hidden by the border of the MT4 window, and then down until the time line was hidden, too. This way I could see the chart only, no prices, no times. Then I paper-traded Euro on H4 and M30, with all my knowledges, trying to apply everything I know now, after years of trading, on a chart running since 1999 to present. Well... to present is too much to say... I started in 1999 with a 10K standard account, but the best I could do was to wipe it out in late 2002 or 2003. Even if I made 20%, or 30%, or even 50% for the first years, later on, something went wrong. I tried G/U and G/J with the same result. The market in the past is not the same as the market today. And it will not be the same in the future. The trading strategy which I use today, same strategy that I used in the last years, same strategy that helped me netting a small constant (real money) profit month by month, should have been futile five years ago. Good for nothing else except losing money. The tool that I am giving you above has 3 big advantages. First of all, you can concentrate on the chart, on the price action. You can add to the visual chart any indicator you like, trend lines, Fibo levels, place the trade, press F12, play with it. The EA will keep all the calculus apart from you, you CAN LEARN much faster. You can check your own strategy much faster and more accurate, even if you have no programming knowledges. At the end, you get the equity graph and the report of trading directly in ST. No pencil, no rubber. The second advantage, this tool has no mercy! Yeah, don't laugh! when you do paper trading with the pencil, you get bored, because it needs so much time, and then you tend to be forgivingly with yourself, just add few pips here, say you could exit here or there, you could enter here or there, well, did not lose too much, add few more profit here, "I could stay longer and make more pips", "well, let's put that pips in the calculus", etc. This toy has no mercy, you see your equity going UP or DOWN. There is no broker behind, there is no stop hunting, no news coming, just you and the chart, and the history chart is the same if you paper-trade it now or next year. The third advantage you will realize in the case you have a working (profitable) strategy. It will show you that trading THAT strategy for the far-past is a disaster. You will understand that whatever "working" strategy you have, that strategy is working NOW. It did not work in the past, and most probable it will not work in the future. The trader who is not continuously improving himself is a dead trader. How about YOUR strategy? Do you have one? If you do, then are you daring to test it on the "paper"? Good luck... .t.

Exista un topic pe vamist, undeva in trecut, cand incercam sa demonstrez cuiva (parca lui vlad, dar daca gresesc, scuze) ca nu este la fel de usor sa faci x% profit cu o mie de parai in cont, ori sa faci x% profit cu un milion in cont. Acolo discutam printre altele si aspecte legate de leverage. Ca idee, cu cat suma din cont creste, desi pare impotriva logicii, este mai greu de realizat acel x%, iar raspunsul la intrebarea lui Marco de mai sus este una dintre cauze. Strict legat de topicul curent, cei mai multi brokeri au limitare pe order si per total. La IBFX, spre exemplu, nu poti juca mai mult de 50 de miniloturi pe bet (la un cont mini, cu leverage de 200 la 1, si 10k/lot, asta inseamna ca nu poti avea tranzactii deschise cu un total mai mare de 500'000$) si la suma asta nu poti avea mai mult de 4 tranzactii deschise. Adica daca pui 4 ordere de 500k, deja ai 2M in joc, ceea ce la leverage-ul de 200:1 inseamna ca trebuie sa ai 10 mii de parai REALI in cont. Ori la suma asta, iti deschizi cont standard, nu mai ai de ce sa te "complici" cu mini cont si loturi de 10k. De asemenea, daca ai cont standard, cu loturi de 100k, limita este de 100 de loturi, nu poti tranzactiona mai mult, indiferent daca ai un order ori mai multe. Adica poti avea deschis un order de 100 de loturi, egal 10M parai, ori doua ordere cu 50 de loturi fiecare, etc. Cifrele pe care le-am dat se pot usor verifica cu testerul, faceti un expert care sa deschida un order cu 110 loturi si o sa primiti "OrderSend Error 131", care va zice un mesaj de dulce "prea multe loturi". Prin incercari, puteti afla care este numarul de loturi maxim pe care il accepta brokerul vostru, precum si numarul maxim de tranzactii (faceti un "for" care sa puna N de ordere, pe N il dati ca parametru, si vedeti unde incepe sa dea erori, respectiv "OrderSend Error 148", sau de dulce zis, "The amount of open and pending orders has reached the limit set by the broker"). La leverage de 100:1, cele 100 de loturi inseamna 10 milioane, adica trebuie sa ai cel putin 100 de mii de parai REALI in cont ca sa iti permita leverageul sa pui un order atat de mare. Si mai trebuie inca o conditie: sa fii oleaca dus cu pluta, ca sa tranzactionezi asa... sa nu iti mai ramana loc de manevra deloc... (10 pipsi in contra si esti in Margin Call, cu minus 10 mii de parai).

@Zink Well... nice report, I only read first line, make no sense to waste my "precious" time, good luck in trading with 35% risk per bet! Imagine you started testing just 3-4 weeks before the date you choose... and lose 2-3 times in a row. P.S. Is "trying to change the stop loss with the same stop loss" part of this cute strategy? If you just want to waste some trading time (OrderModify need few seconds for confirmation) why you just not use Sleep()

@Zink Well, first of all, welcome to vamist. Second, thanks for the expert. As it is, I really doubt that this toy is of any use. We would like to see the source code, of course. If it is a big secret, maybe you can post some source code from another expert of yours, that is not so secretive. We just want to check your programming skill a little bit:D Up to that time, I won't advice any one to use this black box in real trading, especially after a test result like that below (done on Euro, since 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, M15, M30, H1, default parameters, all of them - 15 possibilities - wiped the 10K account in about 2 years). There is no "curve fitting", it could be at least "some short periods" where the equity is raising, but all the time it falls... Most probably you did some optimization for the last year, but if the method itself is good, then it could get "satisfactory" results on the old data too. I mean, not to make profit as in the last year, but at least to hold the balance, and loss as less as possible. Something must be wrong in the conception of the method, itself... If we are supposed to use some other parameters, how about you post them? People won't have time to run endless optimizations for a black box... At least a bit of description of the method, you can post, maybe?!.... Because it seems to take a lot of time for calculus (it is quite slow). There are plenty of errors in the log files, too (most frequent is "OrderModify error 1"). When the balance is quite low, you got also a margin call (do you check the money availability before entering in a trade???). I won't go into the profit calculus, but for about 2660 trades placed, paid spread (at 0.1 Lot) is about $5400 (spread 2). Short/Long trading time is about the same (from the report), so there is an interest difference of about $1000 (roughly) between the longs and shorts. Totally $6400. These money would be "spent" by ANY expert after 2600 trades, on spread and swap, if it trades same amount of lots and stays about the same time in long and short positions. But the rest, 10000-6400=3600, this is NET LOSS by your method itself. Well, if you place 2600 trades in a random direction, with target a 100 points and stop at -100 points, at the end, probabilistic, you will finish with an equity of about $3600 left, from $10000 (i.e. a loss of $6400 on spread an interest, and a breakeven of the random trading, for such huge number of transactions, the odds are really in the favor of breakeven). That is why I would call this method "worse than random". But the most nice part of the testing, is the name property box of Strategy Tester. It says.... copyright 2007... MetaQuotes Software ?????? :) (well, you should tell us if this is just your first ever expert, and you would get a big BRAVO! and claps from everybody, for trying to make your own tools, but to introduce such kind of thing as a good and profitable expert... hmmm... I won't wonder if you will get only slaps...)