It's not a matter of being naive..I make money. Take the time and go over to Oanda and look at some Gridding threads... I currently am not trading it as it is labor intensive. There are some other techniques that I cannot discuss involving long and short at the same time in the same pair, but not exactley as in this threads description Michael B.
Not doing this strategy you don't. Care to explain how you can make money when you have a position that nets out to zero!?!?
Removing the flow out of the range. imagine stretching one year of candlesticks out into a straight line...you will get 12 times (or more) the flow out of it, within the range... There are threads with several variations totaling thousand of posts...this will take this way off topic.. go to Oanda.com in their Forums Michael B.
It's a mental crutch for those unable to close out a position at a loss. You never see this kind of garbage in the fixed income thread or anywhere else for that matter. Somehow, only in forexland. Sorry ES, granted you may be making a profit, but it's definitely not from "hedging" -- trust me.
The drawdown is much too heavy...and the management of it is far too time consuming to do it manually...I adjusted for a style that I could use, but I found something better... If I had a trading room, I would put a trader on it though...I have two other strategies that I would have "specialty executors" trade, but I do not have the capital....still a piker! But what I trade now...no one will ever find out... Michael B.
I went over to the Oanda forum. Why, I have no idea. These people are idiots. I get the impression they lost all their money on WizeTrade software and now are trading FX. These people could collectively compete in the Special Olympics, although I'm not certain they would get a metal. ES, these people are so confused I don't know where to begin.
Mav..lol Your trying to drag me into this...like I am the grid guy... open your mind is all that I can say... I believe you are a senior trader to me, and I will defer to your judgment. there are prolly far more efficient ways to trade and I will keep an open mind. I do not know what is wrong with me, I am having trouble to find energy to explain things, since I am trading my new system. I am getting lazy and no longer hungry, I guess...(this is troubling me, as I know that I must keep my mind nimble for the day that my system stops working) I get excited when I can make 3-7% per month with the most incredibly low drawdown I have ever seen. I know that you option guys can make triple digits, but for me and my world i am very satisfied. Michael B. p.s. i am going to step away from the computer...wifey has finished some very, very hot and spicey chicken wings with Franky's sauce...I am going to burn my intestines now...cya
ES, I don't want you to trust me. I want you to understand if you are long IBM at 80.00 in one account and short IBM at 80.00 in another account, you have no position in IBM!!!!!!!
Mav74, maybe I can clear this up. If you think the IBM way, yes, you're X-shares long @ 80 and X-shares short @ 80 - you have no position. But... not so with the concept of having sub-accts. Example: You open a long 1000-units (micro-trading, I know) of EUR/USD at 1.2510. At the same time you click open a short for the same # of units. Does this mean you have no position? No. It means you have two trades open going the opposite direction. Let's say EUR/USD drops 10-pts (not taking into consideration spread deductions for the example's sake). You can close the short at 1.2500 and pocket 10-pips (total $1.00 due to each pip being worth .10 cents). You'll be 10-pts DD in your long trade. Now the rate fluctuates UP 20-pips. You're now 10-pts in the green on your long, where you close it and pocket another buck. You just made 20-pts. 10 short. 10 long. Your short was open/closed in sub acct 1. Your long was open/closed in sub acct 2. You had two browsers open accessing the same platform - only, one was logged into sub acct 1, the other logged into sub acct 2. It's a very valid strategy - done this lots of times. True, you use up twice as much capital, but that doesn't negate the method. Any questions? DD