if you average in using multiple small positions and lose on that and then trade one big position equal in size to the aggregate small ones and win much more you will show negative pip count. which is what happened to me. XAU magnifies that because of the way myfxbook treats XAU (which they are fixing now based on my suggestions). nothing to do with martingale.
Actually what you do is the definition of a martingale technique, which is adding to a losing position and increasing the size of the previous trades.
Well said. Apparently and admittedly it IS a MARTIGRID strategy... ('average in using multiple small positions and lose on that and then trade one BIG position...')
As suspected... Cost averaging, i.e. adding to losing positions even larger position(s) IS MARTIGRID by definition and it is a very risky business. It is good until it is not good...
Just look at VONTOGR's, alias Tomas' famous (or infamous) Caesar strategy. It was a Superstar until the moment it has become a Falling Star, costing many-many people a lot of money by losing their funds, plus the generous fees paid to Mr. Tomas. And it was not even MartiGrid, 'just' a simple Grid.
No SERIOUS investor would consider a MARTIGRID strategy suitable for SERIOUS funds. Period.@zarni
After admitting 'cost averaging' with larger and larger position sizes, i.e. using MARTIGRID, I don't care about Trade History. And nobody else should care about it. You said: 'you think i'd be dumb enough to trade my own funds 250k worth on martingale??'
Well, yes, apparently you are dumb enough doing just that.
Actually after lying about the nature of the strategy (i.e. not being MARTIGRID) and 'lecturing' me about the opposite, YOU should be the one coming with a HUGE APOLOGY.
If not, then F*CK OFF! PLEASE...
Please click "Vouch" if you liked my post. If not, just put me on your Blocked list. :o)