Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

mctaff

Easy Language Stop Loss Problem

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I'm just starting to learn Easy Language, yet am having problems with stop loss setting when testing strategies.

 

Although the stop loss is set in the code, it seems it isn't always acted upon.

 

Not sure what I'm doing wrong... any ideas most appreciated!

 

Code sample:

 

if Condition11 and Condition12 then

begin

Buy 1 contracts next bar at market ;

SetProfitTarget(3000) ;

SetStopLoss( 100);

end;

 

 

In the most recent test, the first trade closed $100.78 down, the second is $16,091 down and still open!

 

Ideally I'd like to set a pip based stop loss (that works!), but it doesn't seem clear how to do this looking at the docs...

 

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  zdo said:
What happens if you pull

SetProfitTarget(3000) ;

SetStopLoss( 100);

outside the block?

 

Yes spot on zdo !

 

the code should read like this:

 

if Condition11 and Condition12 then Buy 1 contracts next bar at market ;

 

SetProfitTarget(3000) ;

SetStopLoss( 100);

 

 

Cheers

 

Blu-Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice guys, I'll try that this evening.

 

However, I'd sincerely hope that doesn't work, otherwise I'm questioning the language designers competancy! Surely the idea of a code block is that the entire contents of it get executed when the conditions are met?! I don't want to be setting stop losses etc unless the order has been executed, although I suppose it makes little difference...

 

Enough ranting, I'll try it out, cheers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  mctaff said:
Thanks for the advice guys, I'll try that this evening.

 

However, I'd sincerely hope that doesn't work, otherwise I'm questioning the language designers competancy! Surely the idea of a code block is that the entire contents of it get executed when the conditions are met?! I don't want to be setting stop losses etc unless the order has been executed, although I suppose it makes little difference...

 

Enough ranting, I'll try it out, cheers!

 

 

It will work, the fault in the code is that Easy Language will only read that block of code if Condition11 and Condition12 are true. So it will read it at the time of execution.. but in a couple of bars time, for example, Condition11 and Condition12 are false it will therefore not read that block of code.

 

Also "SetStopLoss" will only come into force if a Position is filled.

 

Hope this helps

 

Blu-Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It worked - thanks again!

 

I think I must be misunderstanding how the stop loss code works then - I assumed at the time of the order being placed, the stop would be associated with the order. Looking at the code, that clearly can't be the case, as the stop loss command doesn't reference the order.

 

I'm now slightly confused how to open multiple orders, and have different profit and stop values for different orders!

 

Is this possible? Is it possible to link the profit / stop commands to the order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  mctaff said:
...I think I must be misunderstanding how the stop loss code works then - I assumed at the time of the order being placed, the stop would be associated with the order. Looking at the code, that clearly can't be the case, as the stop loss command doesn't reference the order.

 

I'm now slightly confused how to open multiple orders, and have different profit and stop values for different orders!

 

Is this possible? Is it possible to link the profit / stop commands to the order?

 

First, 'get it' that (exit) orders are continously 'cancelled' and re-entered in TS. :doh:

 

Then re multiple orders and linking exits to that position

you can name posititions and use the names in the exits

and / or

you can use reserve words like SetStopContract

and / or

run separate / stand alone exit strategies

and / or ...

 

hth... this post only cost me $3000 so far...:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  zdo said:
First, 'get it' that (exit) orders are continously 'cancelled' and re-entered in TS.

 

Yeah I figured that from the solution. I was under the impression that if you ticked the "send stop to server" checkbox (or whatever it's called) on the strategies automation tab, that you only needed to send it once and it would be held on TS servers - so if I lose my connection I don't lose 10k as well!

 

Is that not the case? Or does that not work with back testing?

 

Cheers,

 

David.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i have a current issue atm and i was wondering if anyone could help me.

 

scaling in:

 

If condition3 and Condition4 and MarketPosition = 0 then begin;

Sell ("sell") Cts contracts at Market;

End;

 

If (Condition3 and Condition4) AND MarketPosition = -1 AND C < EntryPrice-0.0010 then Begin

sell ("Sell2") Cts contracts Market;

End;

 

If (Condition3 and Condition4) AND MarketPosition = -2 AND C < EntryPrice-0.0010 then Begin

sell ("Sell3") Cts contracts Market;

End;

 

but id also like to beable to scale out. if for instance the price went above the third order by X amount id like to close it but still keep the remaining 2 open.

 

someone above mentioned NAMING your orders. how exactly would i go about doing this.

 

thanks again for your help

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Firefly said:
i have a current issue atm and i was wondering if anyone could help me.

 

scaling in:

 

If condition3 and Condition4 and MarketPosition = 0 then begin;

Sell ("sell") Cts contracts at Market;

End;

 

If (Condition3 and Condition4) AND MarketPosition = -1 AND C < EntryPrice-0.0010 then Begin

sell ("Sell2") Cts contracts Market;

End;

 

If (Condition3 and Condition4) AND MarketPosition = -2 AND C < EntryPrice-0.0010 then Begin

sell ("Sell3") Cts contracts Market;

End;

 

but id also like to beable to scale out. if for instance the price went above the third order by X amount id like to close it but still keep the remaining 2 open.

 

someone above mentioned NAMING your orders. how exactly would i go about doing this.

 

thanks again for your help

 

You have named them.

 

You've called them: "Sell" "Sell2" and "Sell3"

 

I you want to scale out you need to set a target price and Buy to Cover (for a Short) or Sell (for a Long) at a LIMIT price:

 

Example:

Inputs: EXITatTarget (TRUE),

Target1Qty(1);

 

vars: EXITPrice(0);

 

// Calc ExitPrice

add some logic to calc your exit based on a target or whatever...

 

if Marketposition=-1 and EXITatTarget =TRUE then Begin

Sell ("Target1") Target1Qty Contracts total next bar at ExitPrice Limit;

end;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for replying to my post. unfortunately i still cant get it to work. when i input "EXITPrice(0) in the variables it doesnt like it.

 

i was trying to get the following:

 

if marketposition = -2 AND the price of"sell2" < CURRENTPRICE+0.0005 then begin:

 

obviously easy language doesnt like that though + i had a look at EXITprice and it says the following:

 

If last trade exited at 455.75 then ExitPrice(1) = $455.75

 

im not sure thats what im looking for

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for your reply but i cant get it to work. im looking to compare the price of "sell2" to the current price + or - a certain amount. if this is then true id like to close one of my positions.

 

the definition of exit price i got said it returned the value of the last exit.... if u placed[1] at the end and that it could be used to compute the last 10 prices. im not sure thats what i was looking for.

 

any other ideas??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever I am debugging a strategy I use the EasyLanguage Output Bar and a Print line to help understand what is going on.

 

Example:

 

PRINT Barnumber," Date ",Date," Time ",Time," MarketPosition ",MarketPosition," EntryPrice ", EntryPrice," ExitPrice ",ExitPrice);

 

Then I would consider how to best retain or refer to the value you are looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I wanted to use the Hull Moving Average (jtHMA) for a crossover strategy instead of a simple or exponential moving average crossover strategy, how would it be coded in Easy Language for a fast length jtHMA(10) and a slow length jtHMA (20) with parameters that if fast avg jtHMA crosses above slow avg jtHMA then BuyLong 100 shares next bar at market, and SellShort if reverse, and would like to be able to displace the jtHMAs + or -1, 2, or 3, and will be using this on a 30 or 60 min. timeframe?

 

Also, is it possible, or even necessary, to put within the strategy a buy/sellshort order with a pre-set stoploss? Possibly something like:

 

If conditions are met for fast jtHMAavg crosses slow jtHMAavg, then begin;

buy/sellshort 100 shares next bar at market;

SetProfitTarget(1000);

SetStopLoss( 100);

end;

 

This is going to be my first time using a strategy for Tradestation, and want to backtest it, haven't tried that and not sure how to figure it in for possible flaws and slippage for backtesting. I'm going to use it on a 2x or 3x Proshares or Direxion index fund, and the position will reverse immediately when the jtHMAs cross on the next bar after the cross, from long to sellshort, or vice-versa. Not sure if that brings more problems, the instant reversal.

 

 

Thanks for any help.

 

Curtis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dont know anything about this moving average thing ur talking about so cant help there... sorry

 

 

Inputs: inputa,

inputb,

inputc;

 

Variables: vara,

varb,

varc;

 

Condition1: jtHMAavg1[1] > jtHMAavg2[1]

 

Condition2: jtHMAavg1[1] < jtHMAavg2[1]

 

If condition1 then begin;

Buy ("buy long") 100 Cts contracts next bar at market;

End;

 

If condition2 then begin;

sell ("sell short") 100 Cts contracts next bar at market;

End;

 

SetProfitTarget(1000);

SetStopLoss( 100);

 

that SHOULD be right but i havent checked it in easy language as im just going out but it should give u an idea of how it possibly should look.

 

hope that helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First post! :cool:

 

Did you ever get this to work ?

You're forgetting one important statement. I believe the order system is configured for equities by default. you have to specify that you're trading contracts...

 

From the EasyLanguage manual:

  Quote
SetStopShare or SetStopContract - exits are calculated per share or contract.

 

So your could would need to be something like:

 

Inputs: StopAmt(1), ProfitAmt(1);

SetStopContract;

SetStopLoss(StopAmt);

SetProfitTarget(ProfitAmt);

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you use a

 

SetProfitTarget(33%);

SetStopLoss(8%);

 

using a % instead of a number, and is that how you code it, and how do you code an ATR trailing stop I've seen several authors refer to using to implement a stop loss?

 

Thanks for any help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why wouldn't this work?

 

If MarketPosition = 1 then

Begin

SetStopShare ;

SetStopLoss ( LongEntryPrice - (0.002 * LongEntryPrice) ) ;

End ;

 

If MarketPosition = -1 then

Begin

SetStopShare ;

SetStopLoss ( ShortEntryPrice + (0.002 * ShortEntryPrice) ) ;

End ;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  drosengarden said:
So why wouldn't this work?

 

If MarketPosition = 1 then

Begin

SetStopShare ;

SetStopLoss ( LongEntryPrice - (0.002 * LongEntryPrice) ) ;

End ;

 

If MarketPosition = -1 then

Begin

SetStopShare ;

SetStopLoss ( ShortEntryPrice + (0.002 * ShortEntryPrice) ) ;

End ;

 

 

 

SetProfitTarget and SetStopLoss orders

are posted to broker when there is an open position.

 

The target and stop will be automatically* withdrawn

if the position is closed.

 

* automatic means you do not need to code a logic to withdraw the orders,

they are done automatically as soon as the position is closed.

Edited by Tams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few weeks ago I had occasion to chat with the leadership of the TS development team and they acknoledged certain issues with the TS Trade Manager.

 

They say that TS v 9.0 will be out this summer and among the changes will be a millisecond time stamp and EL orders will become "smart objects."

 

As their oldest customer I was about to bail on them which would have meant a major migration effort as over the years we have written over 2k EL code modules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Firefly said:
Hi, thanks for replying to my post. unfortunately i still cant get it to work. when i input "EXITPrice(0) in the variables it doesnt like it.i was trying to get the following:

 

if marketposition = -2 AND the price of"sell2" < CURRENTPRICE+0.0005 then begin:

 

obviously easy language doesnt like that though + i had a look at EXITprice and it says the following:If last trade exited at 455.75 then ExitPrice(1) = $455.75im not sure thats what im looking for

 

MarketPosition will never be -2. MarketPosition can only be 1 or 0 or -1, however MarketPosition * CurrentShares could be -2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.