Ultra Hedge *Beta* - JPow

Avatar
Jerome Powell
  • updated
  • Running LIVE

Hi Guys,

I´ve been working a new system lately. An ultra hedge system. What does that mean I will explain soon: 

Well, rates are rising globally. This will lead to alot more volatility for forex because it´s getting more interesting to park money in cash. Our martingale system needs to become more well-conceived.So I developed this setup. 

We working with different Phases and the same pairs. What I got so far; 

Pairs are marked as: N = neutral / S = Sell / B = Buy 

Phase 1: CHFJPY (N) / EURCHF (S) / EURJPY (B)

Phase 2: GBPCHF (N) / CHFJPY (S) / GBPJPY (B) 

Phase 3: USDCHF ( N) / EURCHF (S) / EURUSD (B)

Phase 4: EURUSD (N) / USDJPY (S) / EURJPY (B) 

All simple, its just Stochastic who either buys or sells. The (S) part is just reversing the signal. The "N" is the decision maker. So it´s supposed 

to 2 vs 1 (the hedge). 

This backtesting is hard and not really possible so I set up a live signal: https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/1745827?source=Site+Signals+My

Any suggestions for improvements? Is it possible to connect the the pairs for each phase? ( maybe via the magic number?) So it closes every phase individually. Of course the "Phases" can be expanded to more pairs. 

Anyway here are the sets.

 Ultra Hedge.zip ( the magic number need to changed for every pair) 

MT version:
Set for MT5 only
EA version:
2.48
Symbol:
Mulitple
TimeFrame:
M5
Replies 668
Avatar
1
HAB_Trader

Ich think on V1 your Risk is to high. To become a more statik risk you need to set all lot/1000 to 0.005. that is why my test is still running. 

Avatar
0
ferdinand tampubolon
Quote from Jerome Powell

Both Accounts blew up today. I gotta figure out why really but so far its caused by USDCHF. Today I also finished the improvement rahman had suggested. I´m gonna set up a live signal soon. @Ferdinand how was your signal doing? 

Ultra Hedge V2.zip

I used the same MN for every phase. I guess there is no need of changing, but take a look I´ve might did a mistake, just check. 


Phase 1: EURUSD (N) - GBPUSD (R) - USDCHF (D)

Phase 2: AUDCAD (N) AUDUSD R) USDCAD (D)

Phase 3: EURAUD (N) GBPAUD(R) AUDNZD(D)

Phase 4 :EURCHF (N) GBPCHF (R) AUDNZD (D) 


I needed to use audnzd twice cuz to avoid the jpy pairs audnzd hast the highest anti correlation. 

my signal is still alive :)

start 10.000 usd demo ( all phase diferent uniq magic number )

profit 1.500 usd demo

floating today 18/11/2022 8:37 AM = - 173 usd

dd max on eye -800usd

phase 3 only is survive but alert is very loud and repeat 

start balance 900

profit 463

floating now -177 usd

max dd yesterday -900usd 

* filter news Global Account profit 1 USD  = PAIRNEWS ( in comment trading hostory)

* filter news no Global account = PAIR no GA ( in comment trading hostory)

* NO filter News GA 1 USD = PAIR ( in comment trading hostory)

hardware using laptop online 24/7 

here proof data phase 3

DetailedStatement-Pphase3.gif
DetailedStatement-Pphase3.htm

data all phase 

CP.7z

start balance is recomended is 2000-3000

Avatar
0
Jerome Powell
Quote from ferdinand tampubolon

my signal is still alive :)

start 10.000 usd demo ( all phase diferent uniq magic number )

profit 1.500 usd demo

floating today 18/11/2022 8:37 AM = - 173 usd

dd max on eye -800usd

phase 3 only is survive but alert is very loud and repeat 

start balance 900

profit 463

floating now -177 usd

max dd yesterday -900usd 

* filter news Global Account profit 1 USD  = PAIRNEWS ( in comment trading hostory)

* filter news no Global account = PAIR no GA ( in comment trading hostory)

* NO filter News GA 1 USD = PAIR ( in comment trading hostory)

hardware using laptop online 24/7 

here proof data phase 3

DetailedStatement-Pphase3.gif
DetailedStatement-Pphase3.htm

data all phase 

CP.7z

start balance is recomended is 2000-3000

Yes Ferdinand and Thorsten you both are, the risk needs to be adjustested, as well as the martingale. I would say the lot coefficent to 1.5? 

Moreover so far I dont like the V2. It does not seem to be as balanced as V1. Therefore I will do adjustments on the set files, but I will communciate it. So far the review of V1 seems to be harder than expected. I´m trying to fit it to volatility and the martingale not to stepsize but to timeframe. 

Anyway we get this working long term. One big step is to decrease martingale and lotsize, what would you say? 

Avatar
0
san takashima
Quote from Jerome Powell

Yes Ferdinand and Thorsten you both are, the risk needs to be adjustested, as well as the martingale. I would say the lot coefficent to 1.5? 

Moreover so far I dont like the V2. It does not seem to be as balanced as V1. Therefore I will do adjustments on the set files, but I will communciate it. So far the review of V1 seems to be harder than expected. I´m trying to fit it to volatility and the martingale not to stepsize but to timeframe. 

Anyway we get this working long term. One big step is to decrease martingale and lotsize, what would you say? 

Having run the v1 and v2 on a demo account, I kind of feel that v1 is more balanced.
The only problem, kind of, was the Japanese gov intervention over the end Oct/Early Nov on JPY pairs which does not happen every day.
I'm thinking of running the v1 on a real account from Monday afternoon next week.

Avatar
0
ferdinand tampubolon
Quote from Jerome Powell

Yes Ferdinand and Thorsten you both are, the risk needs to be adjustested, as well as the martingale. I would say the lot coefficent to 1.5? 

Moreover so far I dont like the V2. It does not seem to be as balanced as V1. Therefore I will do adjustments on the set files, but I will communciate it. So far the review of V1 seems to be harder than expected. I´m trying to fit it to volatility and the martingale not to stepsize but to timeframe. 

Anyway we get this working long term. One big step is to decrease martingale and lotsize, what would you say? 

yes make it different 

coef is 1.5 up is better

but we dont know the future 

make a two set with different coef  . ( one is 1.5 and other is more that like 1.8-1.9 ) for comparison

volatility is have importan to change each pair, 

timeframe biger is better but execution in short timeframe

pending order is have importan to play in martingale 

and the last new is on is better 

lot size is 0.01 is default 

Avatar
0
Jerome Powell
Quote from ferdinand tampubolon

yes make it different 

coef is 1.5 up is better

but we dont know the future 

make a two set with different coef  . ( one is 1.5 and other is more that like 1.8-1.9 ) for comparison

volatility is have importan to change each pair, 

timeframe biger is better but execution in short timeframe

pending order is have importan to play in martingale 

and the last new is on is better 

lot size is 0.01 is default 

Alright I´m gonna change that, as well as the second AUDNZD, i´m gonna replace with CHFJPY 

Avatar
0
ferdinand tampubolon
Quote from Jerome Powell

Alright I´m gonna change that, as well as the second AUDNZD, i´m gonna replace with CHFJPY 

can u make this pair for phase too there is no usd no europe 

audnzd

nzdcad

audcad

Avatar
0
Jerome Powell
Quote from ferdinand tampubolon

can u make this pair for phase too there is no usd no europe 

audnzd

nzdcad

audcad

Can you explain again please, thank you

Avatar
0
Jerome Powell

*** UPDATE ***

As V2 doesnt seem to be steady as V1 I tried to improve it. Those Improvements included: 

1. Replacing in Phase 4 AUDNZD with CHFJPY 

2. Decreasing Lot Per 1000 from 0.01 to 0.001 

3. Changing Lot Coeff. from 2 to 1.5 on every pair. 

I hope it brings an improvement. 

https://www.mql5.com/en/signals/1778991?source=Site+Signals+My

I´m also still working on V1. 

As well as looking at Chris Tom´s (big thanks btw) Signals it only affects the RoboForex accounts. I guess for the amount of money the leverage of 1:2000 is to big. 

Avatar
0
Pham Tuan Anh

Since the minimum lot per order is 0.01, maybe you need a balance of 10k to set up the value of lot size /1000 by 0.001.