I got it working, but I am not finished with it. It requires more “understanding”.
The first attachment shows a loss in the middle of a bar. All losses do this, and they do it perfectly. Sadly this is my method with the Limit.
The second attachment shows one example with the Pending Stop Loss. It is hard to find any which exits in the middle of a bar. They mainly seem to overshoot, like you see in the 3rd attachment. For this situation (overshoot) I can’t quickly reason whether this is OK or not, but where my Limit all looks “logical” the Pending Stops hardly do anywhere.
One would say that I apply all correctly (otherwise I would not have gotten the Limit to work fine ?), but both work out differently for sure.
Both situations don’t perform the same, but the main line is equal (4th attachment shows the Limit).
All feels like a Stop behaving differently on the Market than a Buy/SellShort (which it is for the Limit situation). But difficult to judge (for me) because it is backtesting.
Ah … wait … I think I already mentioned it in between the lines … A Buy (/SellShort) must first drop under the price before it goes up and then buys from “under” but buys “above”. A Stop would drop *at* the price which is a little lower. Ehmm … bzzz … Which thus incurs for a bit more loss.
People can also try to wrap their head around the fact that almost all Limit-exits are followed by a Buy (SellShort) again in the same bar. With the Stop this hardly happens (if you look at mentioned overshoot you can already see it won’t do that). This is the ATR logic in the Strategy doing this, which is also why the Limit feels way more natural (to me ? because I use it all the time manually anyway ?).
No room for more attachments in this post, but the Pending Stop makes 15K profit of it. So although the general line is very similar, the difference is significant (and could be coincidence – just saying).
More later.
.
