You can flip the grid by putting negative Grid size.
If you want to do it manually,
I'm not sure about the average 5 pips closing, as I use netting system myself. I guess you can do it with the bucket of trades -block.
I would make another variable (:D) that just counts the trades opened. Then you could put first condition like "tradecount == 0" -> if true, use default settings,
-> if false, "check profit" etc.
@reyxv16 I didn't fully understand you, but how are your orders moving? Automated or manual? If you have automated the moving, then you could simply store the price to a variable and then check if that variable changes..
This should do. Note the "on Trade" tab (and also this is only for buy)
@miro1360 Yes, I have used it too, just like you said 
It is just not very "flexible" for my needs, it heavily depends on the calculation period... My goal is to find a system that can evaluate not only trend from x bars, but also a bit longer and a bit shorter period - the market does not always make x bars cycles
@drayzen hahaha
As I said, this is a year old project, I must recall what I was thinking:
The core principle is to sell RSI 70 and buy RSI 30 (block 11 downwards).
I like to use a trigger with rsi, for example: sell at 70, rsi comes back to 50 -> another sell at 70 is now allowed.
Rest of the blocks are to determine the main market direction, and to restrict selling an uptrend for example.
Block 2 downwards is checking how many consecutive days rsi is >50 and also price > BB (and vice versa for downtrend) Variables Dd = "days down" and Du = "days up"
Block 24 downwards is to find high and low point of the last swing (roughly)
Block 18 downwards is to calculate the midpoint of those highs and lows (variable "med"). This is used to restrict unwanted sells and buys..
To be honest, I doubt my main trend analysis does any good - the core principle of selling rsi 70 and buying rsi 30 with the trigger mechanism is quite good on its own.
I havent traded this, didn't trust this enough.
Initially wondering if a 'No Trade' instead of the 'Once per bar' would enable more opening opportunities? (just thinking of my own issues with having it first)
I have found it best to always use once per bar. "No trade" would maybe create 0.000001% better trading results, or maybe that much worse - in any case, the difference is not much but it would greatly slow down the backtesting.
I think sharing one's ideas is a great way to create something new. New approaches to design.
For the profitabitily, I still believe you can make an EA you can rely on to make profit in the long run. It is not easy task by any means, but on the other hand, people didn't believe airplanes were possible either.
@4tronic, Think clever: If you find a profitable "edge" to trading, that means the price is above/below the "real value". The more people utilize this gap, the smaller it gets. This leads to conclusion sharing is bad, BUT considering the volumes in forex market - you can hardly create so popular EA that it affects the market anyway
Above is also the reason why smaller ETF funds tend to outperform the market (and also bigger funds) - smaller capital gives the ability to profit from smaller market anomalies.
Last year (May 2017) I made some very simple ea based on bollinger bands and rsi. Today I backtested it again and surprisingly it would have worked the last year similar to the earlier years. This is not very common in backtesting - usually the bots fail after the period they are initially tested and developed on.
Feel free to use this ea (as an example, start point, inspiration, what ever). Maybe you can even improve it.
Note: this only works on a mt5 netting method account
https://fxdreema.com/shared/pTIbLpWob
Update 30.12.2022: Bot seems to be working still, without any changes since 2017
Update 29.8.2023: Refactored the EA to work on modern hedging method mt5 accounts. Also simplified the strategy to what matters the most (theres lots of useless stuff in original version), in essence the strategy is this:
The reduced strategy is not quite as profitable as the original one, but still clearly on the black after 6700 trades. Feel free to add your ideas to this.
One solution would be to create a variable that increases every bar by 1;
once per bar --> barcount=barcount+1
Now you could make condition: barcount > 1 before your ea would continue the process.
This can be done with some variable, but
why do you want this, may I ask?
There might be a more elegant solution
That "check profit" works better if you put a "position running" or "for each position" block before it.
Your project has a lot of repetition, there is probably some way to use only 1 logic tree for the opening
@eray-dursun
What do you mean risk is growing?
To use groups, just set a group number when buy/sell, and later you can refer to that group number. In the picture I used groupd number 1 for example.
If your tester refuses to start, there is usually some error. Check the journal
"If position", "Check profit", "Close positions"
You will succeed with these three blocks
@migen
To build on my previous example, I would do it like this:
The 4 conditions now pass twice (for 2 timeframes) so the total "score" for buy and sell can be 8. I also added a block after the buy > sell comparison, where you can define how big the bigger "score" should be.
This doesn't exactly separate between timeframes, but I think it's close enought to your needs and you surely can modify it from there.
https://fxdreema.com/shared/h52NKD4te
How about this.
You can further define the orders by Group#.
Multiply on loss = 1.3
Multiply on profit = 1
To reduce risk, try the "Reset after how many losses" option too.
@josecortesllobat
Yes. Of course there are other kinds of errors, too.
https://fxdreema.com/shared/3PPBbuaDc
Here is a very simple martingale EA.
Its not profitable though.
If you mean to make profitable EA, stop trying martingale - thats a gambling strategy.
Your experts probably has some error, like divide by 0.
