Another hedging question
- This topic has 16 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
-
sound crazy but this should work, or not?
What Roberto said, but *that* would not be the real problem (I would be more than fine with that). But the Placeholder thing has been something that I never dared to start off with; it would be too complicated plus many things would have to be revamped (for how we think), starting with If OnMarket would need to be If VirtualOnMarket1 (and 2 if you want) and then … systems get killed by environmental circumstances, and you wouldn’t know how to restart all.
Fact is that with 2 (or a max of 120) systems you could do a few things. It’s a matter of sitting back and think over (be creative) how you can exploit that and achieve what you want after all.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Yes, that makes sense !
I only know this from Interactive Brokers – where hedging is explicitly not allowed with AutoTrading, not even with two different systems – and where your own position is always dealt with first. This is just a broker thing and thinking of it, it makes sense. Regarding this there’s also an important thing to remember : it may happen in short squeezes that you can’t get rid of your Short position while you were obviously so smart to hedge that with a long position. Mind you, with IB this is thus not possible (also not outside of AutoTrading) unless to do it with two of your accounts (that would work for AutoTrading just the same – just saying). However, IB binds your accounts and know it is you in both cases. Now, only if you get rid of your Long, your Short will be allowed to exit (it is too early in the morning here to reason out the flow, but I recall it is all “logic”). Anyway, you provide the pieces for your Short in that situation (this is about Stocks).
Does the auto trading system retain the position state (which could potentially be costly in terms of system architecture), or does it simply run the system repeatedly while querying the currently open positions from the broker?
The latter;
Once you know about it, you can see-through many redundancies which PRT keeps tracks of on the side line (this is when observing the charts), which are NOT being dealt with redundantly with AutoTrading. Sorry for the bit of a difficult sentence, but you first need to know about the charts and lists, to know that server-side it does not work like that. Watch out though, because you could be working with PRT’s API for IB (in Australia) and then things are different. But readily you will have the real means at hand : observe all in IB’s TWS and you will see the truth.PRT’s charts work like a kind of spreadsheet, with some main figures derived once in a while, the remainder calculated. Good example is Daily Profit. This does not come from Broker’s data but from that “spreadsheet”. And if one figure is off, the daily profit is also off.
Server side, the internal API in there (talking to the broker (IB or IG)) queries the current results always. But, don’t ask me whether this is cached by PRT at some level – I don’t think so because it would be too dangerous. In any event the queries exist and they are there to be used (I worked with IB’s API myself – I mean, as a native language element within C++).
And as I observed, the two systems seemed to generate their own individual gains by looking at the PRT trading board, and I’m puzzled about how exactly they were able to track their positions distinctly if two system queried the position from the broker.
I am sure I did not answer that thoroughly, but I hope you can pose the question/suggestion better now ?
1 user thanked author for this post.
I would urge you to keep on asking. People like me learn from forming the answers (especially in writing them).
I full-heartedly agree that the Exit is way more difficult than the Entry. 🤣
My solution for that became this (at least for the past months – more solutions the upcoming months) :Make a coherent system of going too long in the wrong direction. Below you see this happening, no matter this trade won (this is from 2 hours ago). N.b.: White and pink is backtest (forward in this case), green and red is Live.
If you closely watch the white “average” line, you can see that it consistently dropped because the trade decided to Exit – unlike prior slopes which were more bumpy and which were still given a chance. Of course in this case it should have stayed in, but if we knew all in advance … 😉
This is golden for when being in a loss. So the same mechanism operates there (originally it was made for being in a loss) and it wildly causes the losses to be minimal (for $). Btw this is for Forex and for Futures this would not work out well.In the second screenshot you see it at work for being in a loss, knowing that this implied less than half of the SL because the “market” does not allow to let it get there (the drop is too consistent). Of course there too the decision seemed wrong, but in the end not on the longer term (that’s why I show some to the right of the happening). This was last Friday.
Here’s a strange hint :
When working with systems which hedge (which in my case happens more coincidentally but also continuously), mentally you always win. You (at least me) will always be happy with the winning trade and don’t care about the losing trade because you also have the winning trade. In the 3rd screenshot you see another kind of example of this happening:
So the first screenshot showed EUR/USD and it exited and a few minutes later it should make me sad because it had better stayed in. However, the 3rd screenshot shows another account with a slightly different System, but on the same instrument – EUR/USD. That one stayed in, and I am happy hence not sad at all.
*Because* that system is still in … when things go against that situation, the other – which is not in at this moment, will (or should go) in that other direction (Short in this case). And now all is hedging each other with as a bonus that two systems will be in the winning mood (the 3rd screenshot will go out with profit and the 1st will start in a winning mood).You would say this is all coincidence, but this is not really so. It *is* what I meant with “sit back and be creative” (did I say that in this topic ?), because you can really make mechanisms which work out for you, even if half is losing. Key is to have winning systems in the first place or else nothing works out.
In the end of the day it is about your mood because you always saw things in your favour. The negatives are diminished with that.2 users thanked author for this post.
Thanks! Peter
I like your hedge approach that aligns with a broader theme of maintaining a positive mindset in trading. The examples with screenshots illustrate how this multiple system concept works in practice that can lead to an overall positive mood and potentially better trading results!
1 user thanked author for this post.
Find exclusive trading pro-tools on 
