Need help with this code with exit based on RSI
-
// Definition of code parameters DEFPARAM CumulateOrders = False // Cumulating positions deactivated timeframe(1hour,updateonclose) // Conditions to enter long positions indicator1 = RSI[4](close) c1 = (indicator1 > 40) indicator2 = average[5](RSI[4](close)) indicator3 = Average[20](RSI[4](close)) c2 = (indicator2 >= indicator3) timeframe(default) indicator4 = RSI[2](close) c4 = (indicator4[1] CROSSES OVER 30) indicator5 = RSI[2](close) c5 = (indicator5 < indicator5[1]) indicator44 = RSI[2](close) yy = indicator44 > indicator44[2] IF c1 AND c2 AND c4 AND c5 and yy THEN BUY 1 CONTRACT AT MARKET ENDIF // Conditions to exit long positions indicator6 = RSI[2](close) c6 = (indicator6 CROSSES UNDER 90) IF c6 THEN SELL AT MARKET ENDIFSo if i change my exit between “rsi 2 crosses under: “60” or “70” or “90” i get 3 completely different scenarios!
I havnt changed the entry at all so why wouldnt it take all 3 trades whatever my exit is with the rsi?
trade 1 (pic1) = rsi2 crosses under 90
trade 2 (pic2) = rsi2 crosses under 70
trade 3 ( pi3) = rsi2 crosses under 60
- Pic X1: at the time of the setup candle C6 was FALSE since no crossing had occurred at RSI90 and the trade was opened
- Pic X2: at the time of the setup candle C6 was TRUE since a crossing had occurred at RSI70 and the trade, despite all other conditions being true, was even closed before being entered since opposite conditions were true at the same time
- Pic X3: at the time of the setup candle C6 was TRUE since a crossing had occurred at RSI60 and the trade, despite all other conditions being true, was even closed before being entered since opposite conditions were true at the same time (and at this time also the previous trade was not issued since the crossing under 60 is also a crossing under 70)
That is logically correct as from my point of view, but it seems a litttle bit bizzarre. I knew ProOrder needed a bar before being able to update its status about OnMarket or not. In this case ProOrder should have sent two orders consecutively to the Broker, the first one was a BUY order and the next, immediately, a SELL order to close the position and this should have been reflected in the performance report as a trade entered and exited immediately with a loss equal to (or slightly greater than) the spread. Is ProOrder smart enough to detect such rare occurrences by NOT sending those two orders?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Summary
This topic contains 3 replies,
has 4 voices, and was last updated by 
7 years, 3 months ago.
Topic Details
| Forum: | ProOrder: Automated Strategies & Backtesting |
| Language: | English |
| Started: | 11/15/2018 |
| Status: | Active |
| Attachments: | 6 files |
