You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I read the paper and looked into the both sample codes, but couldn't see many differences with a grid system which opens a contrarian position after an overshoot(which is called a gap or level in grid system) and averages down/up when position is in loss.
For calculating the lot in case of averaging down/up the agent uses liquidity indicator (which is called lot multiplier in averaging system).
I'm afraid I've overlooked something important in this concept that makes this better than a grid system. But I don't know what!
I will really appreciate it if you point me to the differences or advantages of this concept compared to a grid system with averaging the losses.
with regards,
Armin
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi @jbglattfelder,
I read the paper and looked into the both sample codes, but couldn't see many differences with a grid system which opens a contrarian position after an overshoot(which is called a gap or level in grid system) and averages down/up when position is in loss.
For calculating the lot in case of averaging down/up the agent uses liquidity indicator (which is called lot multiplier in averaging system).
I'm afraid I've overlooked something important in this concept that makes this better than a grid system. But I don't know what!
I will really appreciate it if you point me to the differences or advantages of this concept compared to a grid system with averaging the losses.
with regards,
Armin
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: