The issue with grid trading is it cant be back analyzed.
Single commerce fate relies on itself. However, once trading grid the fate of single commerce relies on the following executed ones. Here the endless mixes comes into play.
So any egy created can't be back analyzed. Only slow/boring forward evaluation is possible.
I toyed with a hedged grid in which BUY and SELL pending orders were placed at 20 pips spans from a benchmark price level. As time passes, the price demoned bias towards one over the other and the net sum was the profit. I experimented with various exit egies including trailing stops ranging from 40 to 100 pips and shutting the trade basket on a pair once the net profit reached a target (say 1%). I saw the balance move down and up. The demo account was up roughly 10 percent before I got bored and pulled the plug after 3 months.
In retrospect I believe that this kind of egy could be profitable in the future if risk per trade is kept quite small (I used 0.1 percent of the balance) and more importantly begin the center of the grid in a watershed price level, i.e. a level from where the price is going to have a strong propensity to move in only 1 direction on a fair distance prior to turning. These aren't difficult to find, e.g. price tends to breakout of a consolidation place with a lot of momentum before slowing to undo. One can use a squeeze of Bollinger Bands or contracted Guppy EMAs to find out regions of consolidation if nude charts aren't your thing.
The fantastic thing about this type of system is that it doesn't require predicting the management of price move (provided the benchmark price level has been selected carefully). Moreover, it's more forgiving of a botched entrance as the profitable trades exert their burden to overtake the losses. It does require patience, discipline and rigorous position sizing.
Okay.. .to make a long story short....YES grid trading can be quite successful (my opinion) with very small risk too....but then again you've got to find the way to exchange it this way....and somebody may never find it.... I think there's no impossible in trading only because somebody cannot do it..or states it cannot be done....the is obviously somebody that does do it at the end.... Loe a method that you feel comfortable with and try to perfect it....make it yours.... Good Luck! 4x
With respect, it is simple to have an opinion. Everybody who posts here's one. The question is: Why is it just a wild guess, or would you have a logical argument to support it?
By your logic it should be possible to conquer roulette, i.e. nothing is impossible just because someone says it can't be done; if you can find enough different methods of approaching a problem then one must definitely work; etc..
Well I feel that the reply to the OP's question is no, and here's my supporting motive:
if you don't discover a physically damaged wheel, you can't beat roulette at the long term. Regardless of what playing egy, or money management egy you employ, the house advantage is always 2.70% (or 5.26% on brakes with 00). No matter how many different possible egies there are, or how many men and women say roulette can or can't be beaten, it doesn't change the house advantage.
Using exactly the exact same assumption, if price moves precisely 50/50 constantly (i.e. just 50% likelihood that the next tick is likely to be an uptick, and 50 percent a downtick), then ALL trading egies have an expectancy of zero, and the 'house edge' against you ' is always equal to the transaction prices you pay your br0ker.
When Currency Market is beatable, it is because price (unlike the roulette wheel) doesn't always move 50/50, aka there are 'inefficiencies' or 'non-randomness', and you are in a position to construct a system to exploit these. So the reply to the OP's question becomes: Can a grid system in itself identify market inefficiencies? Grid systems in themselves do no analysis, and so the answer is.
Now you can find zones (supply/demand; support/resistance; call them what you will) where price is more likely to stall, and potentially bounce, than it would 'normally' differently do so. In the event the grid levels were placed at these zones, then it may be possible to acquire some kind of border. There are loads of other potential inefficiencies (e.g. taru gives an example in his second paragraph) but it would be possible to exchange these without using a grid; the grid is effectively doing nothing more than providing an average entrance point into what is otherwise a TA-based system.
Another argument could be that, historically, price hasn't moved more than X pips in a given direction with no Y pip retracement across the way, and construct a system around a premise like this. However, you'd require some extremely comprehensive evidence to offer sufficient statistical assurance that these limits were bulletproof moving ahead. I would also use a debate that's vaguely like yours, namely the longer you exchange for, the more likely you are to finally encounter a price pattern/scenario that defies the constraints used on your testing, making risk management significant. Systems that operate on the assumption it will continue to function given a given situation never occurs are not very robust IMO.
Hence my answer is no, grids in themselves can't offer any kind of long-term advantage. As for the thread topic of success, an edge-less system will eventually cause ruin, and the more aggressive the MM, the more rapidly ruin will occur.
quote In regards, it's easy to have an opinion. Everyone who posts here's one. The question is: is it just a wild guess, or would you get a logical argument to support it? By your logic it should be possible to beat roulette, i.e. nothing is impossible just because someone says it can't be done; if you can find enough different methods of approaching a problem then at least one must surely work; etc.. Well I believe that the reply to the OP's question is no, and here is my supporting rationale: Unless you discover a physically damaged wheel, you can't...
I agree with some that you are saying....like....
Now you can find zones (supply/demand; support/resistance; call them what you will) where price is more likely to stall, and possibly bounce, than it would 'normally' otherwise do so. In the event the grid levels were placed at these zones, then it may be possible to gain some sort of border. There are loads of other potential inefficiencies (e.g. taru gives an example in his next paragraph) but it would be possible to exchange them without using a grid; the grid is effectively doing nothing more than providing an average entrance point into what is otherwise a TA-based system.
I have been investing for a lengthy time and the last 2 years have been trading grid with great success and limited draw down. I understand also that a lot of traders do utilize what they believe logic and the it can't be done (in theory) but my experience has proved me that this is not accurate. . .it is only theory.
There will always be the one that is going to find a way (such as the card counters in the casinos that they kick out). Now live in long term....well a lot of systems do not live in long term....markets change....and maybe tomorrow my grid will stop working....but since almost two years now I am very pleased with grid trading and not the traditional way witch most traders and the way it looks you are describing.
In my entire life I have created companies from 0....and anybody that knows me in Montreal understands that....when individuals told me it can't be done....cause in there mind it was unimaginable ....no it can't be done....if what was based on theory then there would be no innovation, nothing new could be out there, so people would still ride in horses and Ford would've never constructed the 6 cylinder motor if his engineers at which telling him it cannot be done....people like this move everything to the upcoming levels. . .not logic....
So I am sorry I must reply YES you can survive....for how long....no one understands , only GOD.
quote 4x, No need to be sorry! I don#8217;t dispute that your grid is profitable. I'll#8217;t talk engineering, as I know too little about it. But re your comment about blackjack: Blackjack is beatable mathematically because the deck composition is constantly changing; roulette is not because (unless the wheel is physically biased) the odds are fixed. picture In my view, none of that is about #8220;theory#8221;, it#8217;s around mathematics. It goes without saying that my understanding of mathematics is only very basic, and therefore extremely fallible. But mathematics itself is inviolable....
I agree with these comments 100% and want you to know that I always enjoy your posts. Even if forex is a 50/50 match(witch in a sense it's. . .it is going up or down) I believe that we as traders attempt to tilt the odds in our favor, one way or another, even if it's a small percent to get the advantage....this could be done with a lot of work in my opinion.
Roulette for certain that you can not beat ....the more you play the less the possibility you will win anything, there's absolutely no way you can put the odds in your favor at that match. Thanks for the congratulations but if you knew just how badly I have neglected to get there you'd take them back
I will say a couple things about my egy...
First of all the method needs to be successful to start of using....
The way I use the grid is I break down my commerce in let's say 10 entrances....
In this manner my full position does not enter one shot....if the entry is not timed right maybe I have entered only 2/10 of the position....so once it goes against me my loss is modest. When my full position is initiated all 10 levels I shut it at a particular s\d point.
I don't martingale ....
Never average down....or trade reverse...I exchange one direction....very easy...
When the market gets choppy I can sit around till the tendency continues or changes direction and shut my position all this very long term charts....no day trading on grid for me personally....
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:48 AM.
Risk Disclosure: CLIQforex will not accept any liability for loss or damage as a result of reliance on the information contained within this website including data, quotes, charts and buy/sell signals. Please be fully informed regarding the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, it is one of the riskiest investment forms possible. Currency trading on margin involves high risk, and is not suitable for all investors. Before deciding to trade foreign exchange or any other financial instrument you should carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite.
CLIQforex would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. All CFDs (stocks, indexes, futures) and Forex prices are not provided by exchanges but rather by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual market price, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Therefore CLIQforex doesn’t bear any responsibility for any trading losses you might incur as a result of using this data.