New exit rule by profit as % of balance

but you are talking about exit rule for the whole portfolio....

this need to be dane with separate EA, not in every single strategy...this doesnt make sense

by closing all orders in one time, you will impair the backtest of strategy, next pending orders could be on different prices, etc.

hankeys, I mean for the symbol. When you have multiple trades runing on the same symbol by one strategy, each is managed independenly. I think it would be better having the option of closing them all at the same time.

You are right about closing all trades in the terminal and its effect on the overall portfolio performance. This is something else I asked about.

Voted for this task.

@hankeys, I'm not sure to understand your reasoning. If SQ allows a strategy to open multiple trades while the entry conditions are true, why not close them all when the net profit reaches a given amount of pìps/money?

imagine that you close all open trades? what next with other pending orders? what the strategies that are closed should do, open new pending orders or wait?

i think that there are many opened questions...

and what about backtest how to backtest this in the meaning of closing more open trades in one time?

I don't see any issue with backtests or forwardtests, as far I understand SQ, each strategy is independent from each other. Therefore, closing open trades does not affect pending orders. Even when creating a porfolio, each strategy should work independently if designed for that purpose with the builder.

When building strategies with SQX I enable to allow duplicate trades. While the entry signal is true, new trades are opened on new bar. I noticed up to 5 trades active at the same time in M15, but all get closed independently with the set exit rules.

I can create an EA to close all the trades with positive net profit, but I would like to simulate this same behaviour within SQX. I wish I could create the snippet myself using the algowizard.

In summary, if SQX allows opening multiple trades then it should allow to manage the position entirely, not trade by trade only.

hankey is right, back-tests would be very very different with the same settings on the same sample depending on risk size and calculation and starting balance - trades would be mass exited at completely different times. A better "close all" solution could be found by total max pips profit if 2 or more are opened in one direction or maybe just use standard more aggressive exits to minimize overlap off the top of my head. 

I agree with Hankeys. When the portfolio build process changes so that strategies can be calculated from a singular balance, this will impact the performance of individual strategies during backtests because trade rules will be ignored as a function of the other strategies in the portfolio which makes any results essentially useless because you can't infer true performance by doing this. Essentially this will drop trade opportunities at random for different strategies which will give you a per strategy equity curve that isn't representative of how those strategies will actually perform. And the more strategies you add, the worse the drop out of trades between strategies will be. Dont think this would be a good idea.

Typically, limiting profit by % is to prevent over trading but this is a human problem, not a robot problem. To robots, there is no such thing as over trading or under trading. There are just conditions that are either met or not. No need to make robots trade more like humans. You end up severely limiting the performance you are getting because you manipulate the statistics yourself this way.

Thank you for all your replies. I understand better now.

This ticket can be closed.