Something else is (OffTopic) that I think I so much complained about kicked out systems and how we can not find them back in the list of not running systems where they reappear randomly – twice actually because again when making the Stop sign green again – that they now asked me how to improve that ProOrder form for V13.
If anyone has ideas on how to improve the ProOrder form, they can pass it on here. I myself will pass it on to ProRealTime, as they’re asking me explicitly for improvements.
So a first is about being able to find back the stopped and re-activated systems (all in the Not Running tab).
As second I told them is a sort capability on Systems with a Position (can’t be sorted on Position itself because that can be positive (Long) and negative (Short) with thus the 0’s in between).
A separate “Archived” tab is also a good idea IMO. Then you won’t run into the limit of nr of Systems in Not Running, while you always have the history (and Stats) preserved.
?
By ProOrder Form I take it you mean the ‘running and not running’ window?
I desperately want a ‘Period Widget’ so that I can select Today, This Week etc to see which Sytstem performed the best / worst today or this week etc … see attached for a mock-up.
PRT already have the Period widget … on the Portfolio Detailed Report … and so it should not be a massive job to make the Period widget available on the ProOrder Form?
Yea, I recall you asking for that (whether it was obtained in V12).
Back then there was a bit of discussion about it. So what you want is :
Have the results shown over the Date-range you just entered. In there you could still sort on the gain result.
Systems which did not trade in the given Date-range, will be shown in the list all right, but with 0.00 for gain. Mwah … but then the same problem occurs what I described : then those 0.00 systems would show in the middle. Solution after all : leave out those systems, or apply the sorting mechanism I already asked for. This is really not easy to think over, but compare the Optimizer Result form, which can sort on Start Time, but automatically within that will sort on Gain (it does that, as of lately). Thus, some hard-coded intelligent appliance of some sort.
As second I told them is a sort capability on Systems with a Position (can’t be sorted on Position itself because that can be positive (Long) and negative (Short) with thus the 0’s in between).
I can live with the 0’s being in between +’s and -‘s as I would find it useful to identify Systems that had not traded in the selected Period – Today, Yesterday, This Week etc.
But yes if the option is there to exclude o’s then all the better.
It amazes me that PRT don’t give us what we want and a whole lot quicker, rather than spending time on ‘bells and whistles’ that – if PRT did a survey – hardly anyone wanted and, even less use, now they are available?
Like you, I’ve got a whole load more Improvements, but I find I have to be in a positive frame of mind and also have the free time to submit ideas … knowing I could be dead before my Suggestions come to fruition??
Although I am well pleased with V12 (which does have more than a few of my Suggestions incorporated) I am already annoyed at several bugs! I’m amazed the bugs have got thus far after all the PRT in-house testing followed by user beta testing for what – 2 years??
Some of the bugs are that obscure it leaves me thinking … did that just happen?? Most of them are to do with backtesting. Take 1 for example … lots of times, when I have entered a fixed value for variables (in the boxes in the optimiser) and then I press backtest (as I want the fixed values to be set for good) the optimiser decides to optimise again … even though I now have entered fixed values!!
Re … the set for good comment … lots of users may not realise that if one does not do the – set for good – then the values going forward to ProOrder could well be the values from the penultimate backtest!
There I’ve hijacked your Thread – as nobody added to the Topic I started for v12 weirdness – and it always seems, in the main, to be just you and me who experiences weirdness??
I’ve refrained from moaning (much) for the last 2 to 3 years in an effort to appear a ‘nicer chap’ 🙂 so rant over … I need a stiff coffee now … before the US open!
PeterSt, thanks for asking…
Something I really love to see in the ProOrder form is a way to “pause” a system without really stopping it. In this way the system…
- wouldnt open new positions but it will close the already opened
- wouldnt lose any value calculated in previous operations, such as any from STRATEGYPROFIT
- wouldnt need to introduce again the “maxposition” when activated
- ….
That would be a HUGE improvement for me.
And I would love also to see your idea of the “archivement tab”
Hi,
Thanks Peter for leading the initiative.
I am not sure whether it is relevant to the topic or not, while setting the parameters to start a strategy I would love to check a box such as “Auto restart strategy after order rejection”(or any related reason).
Hi Kumo,
ProRealTime will not allow such a thing, because it will – or might get in a loop. Example : out of funds, and the system will keep on restarting.
I understand your frustration, as the other day (I think Nov. 15) I kept on and on and on restarting the systems, which immediately got killed again, until it eventually worked.
But PRT can’t know that in advance.
wouldnt lose any value calculated in previous operations, such as any from STRATEGYPROFIT
wouldnt need to introduce again the “maxposition” when activated
This is definitely something I already put forward as well. Thus generally : preserve the state of variables, so a stopped** system can proceed where it left off when restarted. Although this will be more difficult for ProRealTime to achieve, it is something which really really is necessary because systems get stopped so often. PRT already understands this because they know how much time it takes to start-through a system after it has been kicked out.
**): Thus this is a bit of a different reason than pausing the system, and in the end it might come down to the same as if a system was killed : you know kill the system yourself (it “pauses”) and you restart it with the variable value retained.
Understandable or not, below you see my “Start Through” parameters, which for my MM means are about the original position amount, the current position amount, the amount I want to restart the system with, the current profit and the last profit/loss. Obviously this data must be obtained from the stopped system somehow (also read this as : you can’t have parameters of which you cant obtain the data when the system has been stopped), which normally is the Detailed Report. Now it gets complex because because of the kicked out system, the Detailed Report will start to contain rubbish (we talked about this before), and you’d need to know relatively to the last reliable data, what the parameter values are to be. Thus, if my D.R. suddenly misses 100, I will see a current gain of 1400 but need to remember I need to add that 100, thus it is 1500 (= the base for the StrategyProfit). For me this is by now such a mess everywhere (all AutoTrading Systems) that I actually need to give up, or tweak the data to my likings. This is not my idea of “AutoTrading with Money Management”. Also notice that any AutoTrading System which fails, will turn into a Manual System when the settings are such that it will keep on running. And gone are the statistics data for AutoTrading.
The above mentioned misery will be solved when the variables maintain their value. Of course this is all not that easy, because we will need to reset all on command just as well. Or the other way around : when we copy the system and adjust some things in the code, we might want to retain the variable values from the previous version. And still adjust them ?
The current Optimization Parameters list seems suitable for this all. Thus, it might depict which variables we want to retain. Perhaps something with a checkbox “I am a Start-Through parameter”.
Hi guys,
@Peterst Got your points, maybe we can compromise with at least 1 retry, 3 retries at most as @TempusFugit mentioned. Most of my rejections on IB with DXS and MYM happen due to lack of liquidity since volumes are low on these instruments.
Dear people,
I now passed on all these wishes. In my last message to ProRealTime I announced “this is the about last one”. This gives some headroom for more.
But *if* there is more, I ask you to please come forward with it today, so that ProRealTime can start to plan the activities and form all together in a master plan (all is related).
Regards,
Peter
It would be good if Notes we enter during backtesting and code editing (behind the ? at top of code editor window) could be available / shown / transfer over to the Comments box (was my Suggestion from about 2 years ago) which we now have in the ProOrder window.
This is not a ‘show stopper’ but would be a ‘nice to have’.
(The ‘Period Widget on ProOrder form’ which I posted on above is the priority for me).
Export from the ProOrder form would be very very useful!
Currently there is no way – apart from copy and paste – laborious and sooo ‘old skool’ ! – to save Systems from the ProOrder window.
I am constantly deleting Systems from the ProOrder form when what I want to do is to export the systems to my pc and save in a folder called ‘ex Test’!
‘Email notification‘ and ‘valid until‘ would be far better shown on the top bar (see attached) as this would gain a vital few cm of screen real estate for System viewing.
If above is not possible then if both were located where they are now, but alongside each other … this would be 2nd best option.
I’m excited that we might get the ProOrder form / window as we want it for v13!!
I feel empowered to make changes!!
Thank You Peter for progressing all these changes through to PRT!!
