# Launching Bunjip EA - Wish me luck!



## Stormin_Norman (27 January 2009)

after 12 versions and 9 months of development of the Bunjip EA its about to make its debut. its been fed $1000 and is going to be let loose terrorising the FX market.

wish it luck!!


----------



## BentRod (27 January 2009)

*Re: Wish me luck!*

Good Luck Norm   

Hey You gonna sell this for $99.95 if it works?? :


----------



## pilbara (27 January 2009)

Go Bunjip Go!

9 months development shows great effort and dedication, and demonstrates to the rest of us how difficult it is ... so keep up the good work.


----------



## Cartman (27 January 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> after 12 versions and 9 months of development of the Bunjip EA its about to make its debut. its been fed $1000 and is going to be let loose terrorising the FX market.
> 
> wish it luck!!




go hard Norm !! ----- lets hope its the tip of the iceberg for ya so to speak


----------



## Stormin_Norman (27 January 2009)

thanks guys! if it works ill sell it for $99.95 USD ...with a FREE e-book "Think and Grow Rich" by Napoleon Hill.



can now concentrate on the automation of my trading system; which has been dubbed the Derwent (named after the _flow_ing river in tassie)


----------



## CanOz (27 January 2009)

Really looking forward to this, you'll be posting results?

Cheers,



CanOz


----------



## So_Cynical (27 January 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> FREE e-book "Think and Grow Rich" by Napoleon Hill.




I read that 25 years ago...its just motivational crap.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (27 January 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> I read that 25 years ago...its just motivational crap.




that was the joke 

ill post results if you guys want. i was just excited and had to tell someone who understood. i told my gf and she just said 'thats nice'.


----------



## CanOz (27 January 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> i was just excited and had to tell someone who understood. i told my gf and she just said 'thats nice'.




Thats a classic! How many times have i heard that!

Love to see how it goes Stormin, very interested.

Cheers,

CanOz


----------



## macca (27 January 2009)

Hi Norman,

She sounds like my wife 

They just don't understand do they !!


----------



## >Apocalypto< (27 January 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> after 12 versions and 9 months of development of the Bunjip EA its about to make its debut. its been fed $1000 and is going to be let loose terrorising the FX market.
> 
> wish it luck!!




Good Luck with it mate!


----------



## Stormin_Norman (28 January 2009)

12 hours in:

starting balance USD961.

current equity USD1068.


----------



## pilbara (28 January 2009)

that's great results for a first day at school!! Looks like it's tracking along as you expected with a few drawdowns but an overall positive expectancy.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (28 January 2009)

about 26 hours of trading:

start : USD961

equity: USD1177




ill update again at the end of the week.


----------



## sleepy (29 January 2009)

Hi Norm,

Excuse the dumb question(s) ..

... but is that completely automated with a broker, or are you manually placing trades?
... how many currency pairs are you trading it against? 
... and how many trades do you expect to be taken per day, per week?


bunyip
- a mythical animal denizen of Australian swamps. Its ogreish reputation makes it a threatening figure to children.

sleepy


----------



## Stormin_Norman (29 January 2009)

sleepy said:


> Hi Norm,
> 
> Excuse the dumb question(s) ..
> 
> ...




completely automated using the MT4 code + platform. the broker is IBFX.

it trades on eurusd + usdjpy as they have the smallest spread.

probably a  hundred +  trades a day. depending upon how the market moves.


----------



## sleepy (29 January 2009)

Thanks Norm,

... was the stochastic/MA EA you referred to in one of your earlier posts also fully automated via MT4 code + platform?
... and was it run against the same pairs as the Bunjip?

sleepy


----------



## fapturbo (29 January 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> completely automated using the MT4 code + platform. the broker is IBFX.
> 
> it trades on eurusd + usdjpy as they have the smallest spread.
> 
> probably a  hundred +  trades a day. depending upon how the market moves.




Is it Martingale Style?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (29 January 2009)

sleepy said:


> Thanks Norm,
> 
> ... was the stochastic/MA EA you referred to in one of your earlier posts also fully automated via MT4 code + platform?
> ... and was it run against the same pairs as the Bunjip?
> ...





yeah. we're trying to code that one up atm. its being named the Derwent. 

itll run on more pairs. plus hopefully indexes, oil and gold.



fapturbo said:


> Is it Martingale Style?




yes in the sense of no. its not a true martingale system, but it has some degree of inspiration from it.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (30 January 2009)

there was a big drawdown after the US house passed the rescue package and led to a massive drop in the eurousd in a matter of minutes. however it recovered as seen below.

day 3

start: USD961
equity: USD1406
gain: 46%
trades won: 59%




since this picture its gone into drawdown again. here's hoping it recovers once more before the weekend!


----------



## pilbara (30 January 2009)

the Bunjip seems to use an aggressive strategy, so it will be a roller coaster ride!  When there was a massive change in EURUSD in a few minutes, did the Bunjip have a chance to close the position and make a smaller drawdown?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (30 January 2009)

it doesnt really close positions. it looks at the signals at each fib retracement point and decides if a new position should be opened.

that's what gets it in trouble, but the testing showed it should get through it.

it about doubles its money each week, so the idea is to have more 'winning' weeks the 'losing' weeks, and therefore be up overall. 

it has a stop trade coded into it @ $1000 loss. not that that means much when that's all that's in the account hehe. 

and so the live test goes on!


----------



## pilbara (30 January 2009)

yep I've found similar results in testing, where increasing the position on retracement is more important than closing the position. But I've only done that while the trade is in positive territory.


----------



## Wysiwyg (30 January 2009)

This is great to see though  I`m surprised you`re exposing the EA.Could you reveal if the drawdowns happen in an up, down or sideways trend please?

Looks the goods so far and well done.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (30 January 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> This is great to see though  I`m surprised you`re exposing the EA.Could you reveal if the drawdowns happen in an up, down or sideways trend please?
> 
> Looks the goods so far and well done.




not really giving away too much. if people can take something from my comments good on them  i hope they can.

drawdowns happen during big falls in a quick amount of time, when there isnt a retracement. i need a 1 fibonacci progression retrace to get itself out of a hole. of course the further it falls the biggest the fib retracements need to be to escape the hole.

it love volatile sideways markets the best.


----------



## MRC & Co (30 January 2009)

pilbara said:


> yep I've found similar results in testing, where increasing the position on retracement is more important than closing the position. But I've only done that while the trade is in positive territory.




Works extremelly well if you have conviction of the trend.  

If not, no point.  Choppy markets need quick take profits IMO, no time for pyramiding, unless you average down an extended run that doesn't look to have legs.


----------



## pilbara (30 January 2009)

MrC in this thread I guess we are discussing what we can teach our robots to do.  

When a robot uses pyramiding it is using mathematical rules and kinda becomes like a Terminator or a heat seeking missile, it really gets conviction of the trend!!

Usually forex has strong long term trends overlaid with strong choppy conditions, but occasionally there are strong trends without much of a chop, and this is where pyramiding comes into its own.


----------



## Wysiwyg (30 January 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> it doesnt really close positions. it looks at the signals at each fib retracement point and decides if a new position should be opened.




Sorry Storm I don`t fully understand.So you don`t have a stop loss, you add to losing positions as per a Martingale system and you are trading micro lots.I.e. one pip = 10 cents.


----------



## weird (30 January 2009)

While I have never traded FX, and wish the best of luck, I probably spend $1000 in groceries a month, so I hope you get similar or better returns


----------



## MRC & Co (7 February 2009)

Whatever happened to the Bunjip over the last wk?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (12 February 2009)

thought id give an update:




as u can see a couple of draw-downs, but theyre expected in its operation.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (12 February 2009)

MRC & Co said:


> Whatever happened to the Bunjip over the last wk?




that drawdown in the middle is what happened to it that week


----------



## CanOz (12 February 2009)

Looks good Stormin! Not a bad effort for only a couple of weeks. Any other trade stats for us?

Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (12 February 2009)

Short Positions (won %): 708 (67.51%)  	
Long Positions (won %):  714 (73.39%)

max floating drawdown $430 (43% on a $1000 balance) 
       ***this really should be around 10% - $4,000 rather then $1,000 should be the starting balance for the EA i think (or $400 on a nano account).

Profit Trades (% of total): 1002 (70.46%)  	
Loss trades (% of total): 420 (29.54%)


----------



## CanOz (12 February 2009)

Awesome win rate Norm.

CanOz


----------



## white_goodman (12 February 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> thought id give an update:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




that the account equity analyser indicator?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (12 February 2009)

i believe so.

i made a few changes to the colours. other then that its as the original was made.

here's the mt4 file.


----------



## BentRod (16 February 2009)

Great result Norm.

Keep up the good work.


----------



## pilbara (17 February 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> max floating drawdown $430 (43% on a $1000 balance)
> ***this really should be around 10% - $4,000 rather then $1,000 should be the starting balance for the EA i think



I think this is a good idea for a EA, to give it less capital, just in case it breaks down in some way and you'll get margin called instead of losing serious capital.  Do you plan to make regular withdrawals, or let it keep the money it makes and use compounding to really extend the gains?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (21 February 2009)

as part of my transition from IBFX to GoMarkets i opened a AUD$5k account with GoMarkets for the Bunjip.

the IBFX account i shut on thursday when it hit USD$3000 and recovered its drawdown. this is just short of the $5k i opened the GoMarkets account with.

here is the week's review on the GoMarkets account starting with $5k. quite happy when it ends the week with minimal drawdown. always a good thing.

equity + balance just short of $7k. very delighted with its first week live on gomarkets (ran it for a month testing to make sure it would operate correctly on a new broker).


----------



## fapturbo (21 February 2009)

Looks good.

Appears to have some rather large drawdown periods.

What is the maximum open trade drawdown you would expect to get?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (21 February 2009)

fapturbo said:


> Looks good.
> 
> Appears to have some rather large drawdown periods.
> 
> What is the maximum open trade drawdown you would expect to get?




its survived numerous 200-350 pip drawdowns in both its testing and live accounts so far.

it would take 500-600 pips to threaten a $5k account i believe. and this would be without the slight reversal it needs to escape the position.

i have a mark II of the bunjip running on a demo account which increases profits about 50% and could be argued it also slightly reduces drawdowns. but its only in the early stages of demo testing. im still worried it might confuse itself, so needs more then a week of testing before its fed money.


----------



## sinner (21 February 2009)

Hi Stormin Norman, you should be very proud of your baby, great work I say! 

Can you update us on how it survived the weeks craziness?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (21 February 2009)

sinner said:


> Hi Stormin Norman, you should be very proud of your baby, great work I say!
> 
> Can you update us on how it survived the weeks craziness?




was on the last post of the last page.

first week of gomarkets:


----------



## CanOz (21 February 2009)

Good recovery there. Glad to see i wasn't the only blended. You definately recovered betterthan I.

Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (27 February 2009)

gomarkets continuation:



current balance $8809 AUD
equity $8771 AUD

started 17th feb with $5000 AUD


----------



## nulla nulla (27 February 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> that was the joke
> 
> ill post results if you guys want. i was just excited and had to tell someone who understood. i told my gf and she just said 'thats nice'.




When it works and the millions are rolling in, she will be lining up for the ring on her finger (huge diamond of course). Good luck, hope the hard work and stress pays off for you big time.


----------



## >Apocalypto< (1 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> gomarkets continuation:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




fantastic Norm well done!


----------



## Stormin_Norman (2 March 2009)

i withdrew $3k from it over the weekend.

u can follow along with it here:

http://storminnorman.mt4stats.com/


----------



## CanOz (2 March 2009)

Literally "paying the bills" with an EA, who would have thought!

Well done Norm, its a pretty active little sucker too, almost as busy as TH!



Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (2 March 2009)

CanOz said:


> Literally "paying the bills" with an EA, who would have thought!
> 
> Well done Norm, its a pretty active little sucker too, almost as busy as TH!
> 
> ...




what's TH?

yeah, that's its modus operandi - lots of trades for a relatively small amount. the drawdowns are inevitable, but it has survived some quite large moves against it - and long may that happen.

its doable, i have another 3 EAs in various states of readiness - and if i can do it im sure a hell of a lot of other people could too.


----------



## prawn_86 (2 March 2009)

Yeh fantastic stuff Norm.

I wish i could get $3k per month from a $5k starting account.

You've done the hard work, now go live it up


----------



## CanOz (2 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> what's TH?
> 
> yeah, that's its modus operandi - lots of trades for a relatively small amount. the drawdowns are inevitable, but it has survived some quite large moves against it - and long may that happen.
> 
> its doable, i have another 3 EAs in various states of readiness - and if i can do it im sure a hell of a lot of other people could too.




TH - Trembling Hand - his scalping is pretty active.

Actually i'm working on one with another ASF'er. Its in version 7 now and showing lots of promise. 

Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (2 March 2009)

nice work canoz. it took us 12 versions before we fed the bunjip.

make sure you report on how successful it is. nothing like a happy story.


----------



## CanOz (2 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> nice work canoz. it took us 12 versions before we fed the bunjip.
> 
> make sure you report on how successful it is. nothing like a happy story.




Yes would love to report now but i'll leave that up to my partner!

CanOz


----------



## nizar (2 March 2009)

Norman.
Respect.


----------



## pilbara (2 March 2009)

thanks for posting your results Norm, it motivates us to see that it can be done!!

also this EA shows that martingale ideas shouldn't be rejected out of hand.  This ain't like tossing a coin, where every toss is independent of each other, we are looking at the probability of a short-term reversal during a powerful trend, which is almost sure to happen if there is profit-taking.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (2 March 2009)

pilbara said:


> thanks for posting your results Norm, it motivates us to see that it can be done!!
> 
> also this EA shows that martingale ideas shouldn't be rejected out of hand.  This ain't like tossing a coin, where every toss is independent of each other, we are looking at the probability of a short-term reversal during a powerful trend, which is almost sure to happen if there is profit-taking.




yeah that's it exactly. having a matingale system in itself isnt destined for failure, just drowdowns. the important thing is not to over leverage it. it needs enough space to cope with drawdowns.

if it gets on the wrong side of a trade, it looks for the short term reversal to 'get out' of its position. so far its proved itself to work.


----------



## sleepy (3 March 2009)

Hi Norm,

Whats your plan(s) going forward with this baby...

Are you going to keep it as a $5000 account and take out $3000 everytime it hits $8000? ... that way if it does blow up the worst you will loose is your original $5000.

... and is this how you managed your account with your MA/stochaistics EA?

sleepy


----------



## Stormin_Norman (3 March 2009)

sleepy said:


> Hi Norm,
> 
> Whats your plan(s) going forward with this baby...
> 
> ...




no, this is just the final stages of testing before it gets given 'proper' money. 

i have been offered 60% holding in a trading company based in hong kong to trade for them. so atm im working on modeling how to run it based on the required returns to their investors and how to keep risk as low as possible.

so plans are quite large for it, although i never see it trading huge amounts, its returns are quite pleasing.


----------



## BentRod (3 March 2009)

Norm,
       Won't the bucket shops turn the tap off once you put some real money into it??

Would it be hard to run it through an API at another broker??


----------



## Stormin_Norman (3 March 2009)

BentRod said:


> Norm,
> Won't the bucket shops turn the tap off once you put some real money into it??
> 
> Would it be hard to run it through an API at another broker??




its the only system of its type in the world. ie - its not popular with many many traders using it so it shouldnt suffer from that problem until the amounts get quite large.

at that point, reduction in transaction costs also need to be considered. that's when we will look at recoding it for another system.

the ninjatrader script is apparently another C derivative so any broker that attaches to that would be acceptable.

my programming partner is proficient in C, java and the direct windows language which escapes me - so changing platform and rejigging the code should not be too difficult.

we chose mt4 because of the 'predone' indicators and EAs already in existence within the MT4-EA community, which has been a great help. taking the logic and coding it into another language should just be a matter of translation - similar to translating a book.


----------



## BentRod (3 March 2009)

> it shouldnt suffer from that problem until the amounts get quite large.




Yeah thats what I was referring to.

At what point will they cut you off?

I can't see GO putting up with it, if you had a large account.

Could be wrong though

Anyway, as you mention.....easy enough to code it up for other brokers anyway.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (4 March 2009)

BentRod said:


> Yeah thats what I was referring to.
> 
> At what point will they cut you off?
> 
> ...




why would go be upset? i thought theyd love all the trades, and all the spreads they can make off it.

ill ring them tomorrow and ask them.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (7 March 2009)

end of the week.

+about $1500

copped a smackdown on the pound late in the week, but finished an agonising 3 pips from clearing out.

stats for the week's trades:

total trades: 748

% trades won: 70.59


----------



## fapturbo (7 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> end of the week.
> 
> +about $1500
> 
> ...




Pretty amazing how it can recover from such large drawdowns.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (7 March 2009)

it gets it right 70% of the time, so eventually it has to get it correct.

as long as it wins the race with account balance = 0


----------



## fapturbo (7 March 2009)

How does it test on a backtest over the period 22.7.08 to the 13.8.08


----------



## Stormin_Norman (7 March 2009)

fapturbo said:


> How does it test on a backtest over the period 22.7.08 to the 13.8.08




fine back to 2002.

it ran forward demo through that period as it was refined.


----------



## electronicmaster (7 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> end of the week.
> 
> +about $1500
> 
> ...





You think that is bad draw down.  you should see mine.  I'm still in the game and only need a 60 pip drop to start making money again.  Hopefully on Monday or Tuesday it will gap down (fingers crossed).  Otherwise I could be stuck with draw down for at lest a week.


----------



## Punisher (7 March 2009)

Looking good Stormin.:shoot:
Any idea when you are going to make Bunjip available for other people to try?
I would be interested in giving it a go to see if it would work with us mere mortals as well. :badsmile:


----------



## Stormin_Norman (7 March 2009)

ive had a company in hong kong interested in using it to trade on their excess capital, so am in negotiations with them and the accountants to figure out the best structure for the enterprise.

i get a 60% stake in the end company, and will be developing more EAs to trade on the money as time goes past. there are quite a few in various stages of development; its just a matter of putting finishing touches on them.

i suppose i could always sell 1000 copies of it at $1000 each and become a millionaire; but i think it could be worth a lot more to me long term using it for my own devices.

friends and family have been invited to invest in a company i have set up which will trade it also. just a few people by invitation putting in a couple of grand, which given the current state of the markets cant lose them much more then they have already, and will further lose.


----------



## fapturbo (7 March 2009)

Is it a waste of time back testing using open prices only?

Or should you alway run back test using every tick available setting?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (7 March 2009)

fapturbo said:


> Is it a waste of time back testing using open prices only?
> 
> Or should you alway run back test using every tick available setting?




always run with the most complete data you have.


----------



## fapturbo (7 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> always run with the most complete data you have.




The only reason I ask is because I believe every broker has different tick data.

So one test will be very different to another test when run on different brokers.

Makes testing a little unreliable.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (7 March 2009)

fapturbo said:


> The only reason I ask is because I believe every broker has different tick data.
> 
> So one test will be very different to another test when run on different brokers.
> 
> Makes testing a little unreliable.




i dont buy that. a system either works or it doesnt. if small details such as a pip difference in tick data kills your EA it tells you something.


----------



## pilbara (8 March 2009)

fapturbo said:


> The only reason I ask is because I believe every broker has different tick data.
> 
> So one test will be very different to another test when run on different brokers.
> 
> Makes testing a little unreliable.



I think exact tick data is useful when you want to reproduce the exact conditions that caused an EA to make a trade, so you can work out if there is something wrong with the coding of the EA.  I think it is useful when trying out a new version of an EA, to see if it still produces the same results when you've made coding changes.

But the system overall should be robust and produce statistically similar results (similar expectancy) on brokers with similar pricing policies.  It's a competitive market out there for the bucketshops, so they have to compete on price (via lower spreads, deeper market etc) to attract market share. 

Also you can use monte carlo techniques to introduce noise to the tick data and see what happens to your system.


----------



## doctorj (13 March 2009)

Martingale systems are interesting - can I ask how many consecutive losing trades your system can handle before it busts?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (13 March 2009)

doctorj said:


> Martingale systems are interesting - can I ask how many consecutive losing trades your system can handle before it busts?




i had a draw down of about AUD$1600 on the yen today after 20 trades before a sufficient pullback.


----------



## fapturbo (13 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> i had a draw down of about AUD$1600 on the yen today after 20 trades before a sufficient pullback.




Seems quite large.

What time frame does bunyip trade?


----------



## doctorj (13 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> i had a draw down of about AUD$1600 on the yen today after 20 trades before a sufficient pullback.



So either very very small initial position size or not a true martingale...


----------



## Stormin_Norman (13 March 2009)

doctorj said:


> So either very very small initial position size or not a true martingale...




bit of both.

0.01 initial position on each currency. biggest position after 20 trades was 0.12. (full lots).


----------



## fapturbo (13 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> bit of both.
> 
> 0.01 initial position on each currency. biggest position after 20 trades was 0.12. (full lots).




So I presume average down and add a set amount to each position at set intervals on the way down?

Then close at a set amount of profits?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (13 March 2009)

no wrong on both counts.

'average down' on 2ndary indicator looking for pull backs.

profit increases as more positions are opened. constant pip profit, but calculated on the biggest position. (ie break even is calculated, then profit pips are added).


----------



## Stormin_Norman (14 March 2009)

2.5 weeks on gomarkets.

started with $6k - had settings 10 times overleveraged cause of the change from IBFX to gomarkets (stupid norm ) so took a $500 loss off the bat.

since then the $5.5k remaining balance has hit $10k right at the end of 2.5 weeks of trading.

drawdowns have been quite acceptable and within expected range.


----------



## prawn_86 (14 March 2009)

Thats one fine looking equity chart Norm


----------



## pilbara (14 March 2009)

great consistency Norm, well done!  The equity curves (or straight lines) seem to be similar on both brokers, but the IBFX was steeper than GoMarkets.  Is that a difference in results for each broker, due to spread difference, is it really the same but less risky on GoMarkets by using a higher initial equity?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (14 March 2009)

pilbara said:


> great consistency Norm, well done!  The equity curves (or straight lines) seem to be similar on both brokers, but the IBFX was steeper than GoMarkets.  Is that a difference in results for each broker, due to spread difference, is it really the same but less risky on GoMarkets by using a higher initial equity?




id say the slope lessened because we found that the EA should make its trading decisions based on the close of each 5 minute candle, not each tik.

that significantly reduced drawdowns during big news movements and that was our final improvement to the EA, which occurred between the brokers.

that may have been it.

the balance was roughly the same. maybe the markets were slightly more volatile a couple of weeks ago? not sure to be honest.

but as the equity graph grows (ibfx would delete their history after 2 weeks of heavy trading - go markets retains it indefinitely)  its great to see how the drawdowns look.


----------



## MRC & Co (14 March 2009)

Yes, very good work Stormin.

Congrats.  

If you don't take up the offer from the Hong Kong based firm, I reckon show it to a prop firm and try get some bigger backing (they will do their own testing, but from the results, looks fine).  Their $$$, and you could up the lot sizes, easy to do with large currency pairs as you know, and the rewards for yourself are endless.  

All the best champ, good to see you doing well.


----------



## CanOz (14 March 2009)

Yes Indeed Norm, well done. You've set the bar for EA's on here. 

Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Wysiwyg (14 March 2009)

That is an excellent achievement so far Stormin`.

A big question I have is whether the financial system will allow an auto trading system to be that successful.The potential to create large sums of money is evident from the current equity trend.

Without sounding too conspiratorial, do you think sabotage is possible?Or alternatively, are the EA parameter/signal weaknesses exploitable in any particular currency pair?Will you be allowed to succeed?


----------



## pilbara (15 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> id say the slope lessened because we found that the EA should make its trading decisions based on the close of each 5 minute candle, not each tik.
> 
> that significantly reduced drawdowns during big news movements and that was our final improvement to the EA, which occurred between the brokers.



that means you've gone through about 10 versions of the EA to get to where you are now.  I'm still working on version 1 of my first EA and this shows to me how much more work there is to do!


----------



## Stormin_Norman (16 March 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Will you be allowed to succeed?




i have 3 different versions running now.

interesting to note that rarely do they trade at the same moment.

because its always trading, unless the two EAs are started at exactly the same time, they will actually rarely make orders at the same time.


----------



## CanOz (16 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> i have 3 different versions running now.
> 
> interesting to note that rarely do they trade at the same moment.
> 
> because its always trading, unless the two EAs are started at exactly the same time, they will actually rarely make orders at the same time.




Yeah, this is similar to opening two different platforms at different times and getting different looking candles on the same pair right?

CanOz


----------



## peter2 (16 March 2009)

Keep an eye on the combined equity curve SN. You may find that the drawdown of the combined EA equity is much smaller (%) than each individual EA drawdown.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (16 March 2009)

CanOz said:


> Yeah, this is similar to opening two different platforms at different times and getting different looking candles on the same pair right?
> 
> CanOz




no, even with identical data they would be different. because the EA is almost always trading in a direction, if one has a drawdown when the 2nd EA is started they are unlikely to match up. 

one might be short on the JPY and have 3 positions open while the market is rising. adding a 2nd EA at this time will see it open a position long. even when both EAs are in the same direction theyre not making trades at the same instance.




peter2 said:


> Keep an eye on the combined equity curve SN. You may find that the drawdown of the combined EA equity is much smaller (%) than each individual EA drawdown.




yes, that is something im looking at atm. is seperating the EA into two. one side does only long trades, the other only short trades. then if a prolonged rise in a currency causing a drawdown during a short sell will allow the 2nd part of the EA to buy during this rather then the EA being locked into it original position until it can exit.


----------



## CanOz (16 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> no, even with identical data they would be different. because the EA is almost always trading in a direction, if one has a drawdown when the 2nd EA is started they are unlikely to match up.
> 
> one might be short on the JPY and have 3 positions open while the market is rising. adding a 2nd EA at this time will see it open a position long. even when both EAs are in the same direction theyre not making trades at the same instance.
> 
> ...




At the risk of sounding a bit naive here, could that be why my system produces different results on two different PCs? My home PC, software, data is producing huge results, almost unbelievable, but the entries and exits look ok...but at work, same software, same data, its more tame, more believable.

Can't get my head around it yet.

CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (16 March 2009)

how does it trade?

my results are the same, the means of obtaining them are different.

its not a system which trades irregularly, on an exact signal, like the famous FAP. so multiple instances will unlikely match up as theyll be travelling along different paths.

its kind of hard to explain unless youve watched it happen.

hence the question of how your system trades, not how it calculates them, but how often more so.


----------



## CanOz (16 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> how does it trade?
> 
> my results are the same, the means of obtaining them are different.
> 
> ...




The system is looking for a trend indication, then a spot to jump on. After that its all trade Mgt. to get off the trend, for the most part.

My partner is busy so i've been left to figure it out on my own for a couple of weeks....oh oh.

Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (17 March 2009)

so really it should pick the same spot to trade?


----------



## CanOz (17 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> so really it should pick the same spot to trade?




Almost to the minute i would think.

Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (17 March 2009)

thats strange then you have such a variance in the results then.

same broker?


----------



## CanOz (17 March 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> thats strange then you have such a variance in the results then.
> 
> same broker?




Same data, this is still being tested Norm! Esignal data.

Its not an EA, its just a set of signals being tested over historical data at this stage.

Cheers,


CanOz


----------



## Stormin_Norman (17 March 2009)

farks me then. that's strange.


----------



## pilbara (18 March 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> A big question I have is whether the financial system will allow an auto trading system to be that successful.



if the EA makes money, then we must identify who is losing money.   The EA trades frequently and consistently which creates liquidity for the retail broker.  Most likely the EA opens a position against one trader, and closes it against a different trader, all within the retail broker's book.  The broker would like the EA because they make more money from spreads.  This is risk free income.  The broker is just redistributing money between traders and taking commission.  

If the retail broker cannot match orders internally they must hedge the positions in the wholesale market. The Tier 1 interbank dealers sit on top of the market pyramid with vast resources to make profit at the expense of everyone else in the market.  The "financial system" allows these dealers to succeed, so it cannot prevent a smaller EA doing much the same thing.  For details of how they do it see FTI's thread at ForexFactory
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=57639


> For dealers, its a different game, because when markets are going up in a BEAR market, customers keep making them short, their book keeps getting bigger short, but their average cost of being short keeps going up.
> all they have to do is to wait for the trend to enforce and
> when the market returns to the point where the buying started ,
> he would make nearly the amount of money that made him short in the first place.
> ...






> The trick is to hold very steadfast to the position allowing the snowball build on you,
> the maxim is to be able to take the punches first,
> once the rubber band swings back, whack them like theres no tomorrow,
> within your capacity and keep taking profits along the way untill the frenzy slows off
> then square down for the next attack.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (18 March 2009)

that's a good summary of how i see the market operating and how the EA fits into it.

it should be ok, as its not widely used (only my own companies). if positions get to big, it can be spread across a few brokers and larger brokers, so one doesnt start getting flooded by it.


----------



## Wysiwyg (18 March 2009)

pilbara said:


> *If the retail broker cannot match orders internally they must hedge the positions in the wholesale market*. The Tier 1 interbank dealers sit on top of the market pyramid with vast resources to make profit at the expense of everyone else in the market.  The "financial system" allows these dealers to succeed, so it cannot prevent a smaller EA doing much the same thing.




Good contributor is Pilbara.

In reference to the bold type. Doing away with a dealing desk would surely be beneficial to an individual trader in that they have access to multiple participants.This below for everyone to benefit. 



> A Forex ECN broker does not have a dealing desk but instead provides a marketplace where multiple market makers, banks and traders can enter in competing bids and offers into the platform either inside or outside the spread, allowing traders to be market makers and have their trades filled by multiple liquidity providers.






> A trader might have their buy order filled by liquidity provider "A", and close the same order against liquidity provider "B", or have their trade matched internally by the bid or offer of another trader.


----------



## pilbara (24 March 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Doing away with a dealing desk would surely be beneficial to an individual trader in that they have access to multiple participants.
> "A Forex ECN broker does not have a dealing desk but instead provides a marketplace where multiple market makers, banks and traders can enter in competing bids and offers into the platform either inside or outside the spread, allowing traders to be market makers and have their trades filled by multiple liquidity providers."



That makes sense when the individual is making trades of the same size as the other participants in the ECN. The minimum sizes are quite large for genuine ECNs.

For example, this broker gives you access to the following ECNs: Currenex, Lava FX, Hotspot FXi, Baxter FX, FXall, but requires the following minimums:

http://www.vcapfx.com/forex-commissions.asp

Spreads: Bid/Ask spreads are dependent on market liquidity. 
Commissions: Determined by monthly volume transacted. 
Lot Size: $100,000 USD Per Currency Lot. 
Min Trade Size: $500,000 USD per trade. 
Min. Equity: $250,000 USD minimum required to open account. 
Margin: 1% - 6% varies according to account balance and strategy.

Another broker indicates smaller deal sizes, but also includes the interbank EBS and Reuters (minimum deal size 1 million).  I imagine the DB Autobahn FX would be similar to EBS and Reuters.

http://www.aarontrade.com/html/forex_account_structures.html

 Prime Hub Currenex - Minimum notional deal size 100k.

 Hotspot Institutional - Minimum notional deal size 100k.

 EBS Prime - Minimum notional deal size 1 Million.

 Reuters - Minimum notional deal size 1 Million.

 Lava FX - Minimum notional deal size 50K.

 Baxter FX - Minimum notional deal size 100K.

 FXall Accelor - Minimum notional deal size 100K.

 CAX Aggregator - Minimum notional deal size 500K.


In an ECN you get to see details of the size available at a particular price, which becomes crucial when you are dealing with large orders.  For retail traders with small accounts this is irrelevant.  You'd rather have your broker combine your little orders together and then make a combined large order with an ECN participant.

The following image shows a sample screen from Hotspot, with a spread on EUR/USD at 1.5 pips.  On the Bid side, there is $18.5 million at 1.21360, $21.8 million at 1.21355, $20.8 million at 1.21350 etc.


----------



## Wysiwyg (24 March 2009)

pilbara said:


> That makes sense when the individual is making trades of the same size as the other participants in the ECN. The minimum sizes are quite large for genuine ECNs.
> 
> For example, this broker gives you access to the following ECNs: Currenex, Lava FX, Hotspot FXi, Baxter FX, FXall, but requires the following minimums:
> 
> ...




That is institutional and here is professional ...



> Spreads: Bid/Ask spreads are dependent on market liquidity
> Commissions: Determined by monthly volume transacted and clearing firm selected
> Lot Size: $100,000 USD Per Lot
> Min Trade Size: $100,000 USD Per Lot
> ...




Nothing unusual or out of reach for small traders.One standard lot is US$100,000 with 100:1 leverage.


----------



## pilbara (24 March 2009)

Yep that sounds reasonable! 

BTW I think that $7000 minimum is for Hotspot FXr (Retail) which has been bought out by FXCM.  There is major rationalisation going on the retail forex sector because the regulators are increasing the minimum capitalisation requirements, it's now $15 million and will rise to $20 million next month.  So Hotspot decided to close the retail side of the business and transfer those accounts to FXCM, who have created a pseudo ECN called active trader.   We are seeing fewer but bigger players in the retail side of the business.


----------



## Wysiwyg (24 March 2009)

Yeah just further down the rabbit hole every time.


----------



## pilbara (25 March 2009)

nah it's about climbing the ladder, from small broker to big broker!  

For an EA we all agree the best place to start is with a MT4 broker but then what is the next step up?  What is the best medium size broker for an EA like Bunjip?  I think it might work well within the large liquidity pool created internally by one of the very largest retail brokers (like Oanda) or does it require access to true ECN once the order size gets beyond a certain limit?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (25 March 2009)

pilbara said:


> nah it's about climbing the ladder, from small broker to big broker!
> 
> For an EA we all agree the best place to start is with a MT4 broker but then what is the next step up?  What is the best medium size broker for an EA like Bunjip?  I think it might work well within the large liquidity pool created internally by one of the very largest retail brokers (like Oanda) or does it require access to true ECN once the order size gets beyond a certain limit?




i think the next step is OandA; but im open and interested in people's thoughts.

which platform/language to move to is probably another important question.


----------



## pilbara (25 March 2009)

I think Ninja Trader + Interactive Brokers would be a platform/broker combo worth evaluating.

choices for Oanda might be limited.  You could code the entire EA as a server application with their API, and then monitor the EA and override trades using their regular platform. 

Oanda has a FIX protocol so your programmer could use that to connect to a range of trading platforms, like X Trader.

Maybe if you want to also trade futures, options and precious metals etc, 
check out this list of high-end platforms certified for use with CME http://www.cmegroup.com/globex/intr...tionality/certified-trading-applications.html


----------



## electronicmaster (25 March 2009)

pilbara said:


> I think Ninja Trader + Interactive Brokers would be a platform/broker combo worth evaluating.
> 
> choices for Oanda might be limited.  You could code the entire EA as a server application with their API, and then monitor the EA and override trades using their regular platform.
> 
> ...




I hope a version would work with MT4/5,  Because it works well (and so far the only one) with Linux (and I suppose the MAC too, since WINE is used).


----------



## MRC & Co (2 April 2009)

Whatever happened to the Bunjip?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (2 April 2009)

going strong!




after the hiccup when the fed printed money (which it turned out the EA would have recovered from, but i didnt want to risk it at the time) normal service has resumed.

some programming changes were made to make it more safe, which has reduced the return by about half.

late last week i decided the old system mightnt have been broken, so re-installed it - and it went into a nice big drawdown (seen above) - so ive changed for good back to the new one.

on the .01 lot setting with $5k account, its returning about $650 a week.


----------



## CanOz (2 April 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> going strong!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hmmm,

Sounds like its teaching you a bit about yourself too Norm?

I guess thats why you test too.

CanOz


----------



## MRC & Co (3 April 2009)

Great stuff.

Cheers for the update.  Always good to see.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 April 2009)

I wonder if the Easter Bunyip is happy ?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (13 April 2009)

he's off hiding over easter. letting the thin market pass before bringing him out of the billabong again tomorrow. 

current balance is about 7800 or so from memory.


----------



## prawn_86 (24 April 2009)

Did the Bunyip come out and destroy everything in his path after Easter?


----------



## Stormin_Norman (24 April 2009)

no he's still going. went on a bit of a rampage early this week, but just before he destroyed everything in sight he calmed down and was locked up.


----------



## Stormin_Norman (24 April 2009)

started testing the franklin EA this afternoon.

dont have money management in it. so it was a bit wild and wooly, but it was just an initial test.

$5k->$14k in 12 hours. looking promising.


----------



## peter2 (25 April 2009)

An EA with no money management. 
That would have to be called a "maverick" EA.


----------



## beerwm (25 April 2009)

Stormin_Norman said:


> started testing the franklin EA this afternoon.
> 
> dont have money management in it. so it was a bit wild and wooly, but it was just an initial test.
> 
> $5k->$14k in 12 hours. looking promising.




haha, thats only like 131400% p.a. :


----------



## Stormin_Norman (25 April 2009)

peter2 said:


> An EA with no money management.
> That would have to be called a "maverick" EA.






beerwm said:


> haha, thats only like 131400% p.a. :




yes. a bit over-leveraged! money management/lot sizing will be added.

had to fix the 5 digit broker issue to begin with. over the weekend MM will be added. but a happy start. if only it wasnt monopoly money and real money


----------

