外汇交易与鞅资金管理系统将几乎不可避免地导致炸毁的帐户. 我已经在过去六个月多次写过关于这必然结果. 在白费口舌的风险, 我计算过，亲眼将减轻任何挥之不去的希望一劳永逸.

回想一下，鞅制度宗旨，以永不亏钱. 除了接受损失和移动上, 一个鞅投注策略双打以前的赌注. 每当一场胜利终于确实发生, 所有的损失，直到这一点被全歼. 业内也获得利润，原来的贸易，希望捕捉到相同数量.

实验假定交易者使用 固定分数资金管理 设置 1% 账户价值. 从早期的实验记得，一个 1% 之后的风险值将几乎从来没有炸毁的帐户 200 行业. 百分比精确度的行业保持在 50%, 这是完全随机的. 随机数文件已经升级到包括 10 百万的随机数，而不是以前的五十万.

演习的目的是把重点放在破产的风险，而不是应计利润. 随着时间的推移, 破产的可能性与放置交易的数量增加. 一个贸易是每一个新的事务进入时间. 不要紧，最后交易是否是赢家还是输家.

五十交易上最鞅系统对应于任何从数天至数周. 侵略在贸易层面使用的水平 (即, 画中画距离用来打开一个新的贸易) 是什么最强烈影响的时间以达到50行业所需量.

配售 50 交易显示了大多数交易者知道. 回报看起来相当不错，在这一点上. 如果返回 20% 账户上显示 40% 事件发生的概率. 消灭账户的风险看起来温顺的 8.5%.

增加的交易的编号，以 200, 这对应于数周或数月, 彻底失败的几率猛增至 35%. 幸运的贸易商尚未炸毁秀的回报，从 20% 一路 300%. 总的风险更明显, 尽管许多交易员的牺牲品快速的诱惑, large returns. If it all looks too easy at this point in time, 这是因为它是.

走出去 1,000 行业, 我粗略Ballpark的行业平均专家顾问可能完成量 9 个月到一年, 就是必然的结果是显而易见的. The odds of reaching a zero balance reach 95%. A tiny handful of traders are floating huge returns. 作为交易的数量从增加 1,000 到 2,000 到 10,000, 最终离开户口的很小一部分不断减少到零.

鲍勃 说

Great stuff… could you possibly discuss what it would look like if you were to use an inverse martingale approach?

perhaps where you double up the size every time you win and when a loss finally occurs you drop back down to initial size.

肖恩·奥弗顿 说

Hey Bob,

谢谢你的评论. You would certainly blow up an account increasing the risk by 100% after wins. The reason is that a loss would eventually occur. That loss would wipe out all gains to date, plus result in a loss relative to where you started.

Paul 说

Using a Martingale sytem isn’t my favorite either. As you Shaun, I agree that it will blow up your account in time. One has to be prepared to say that a trade was wrong and close with a loss.

Bob has the idea of are reversed Martingale where you start a grid system when the market runs in your favor. Not a bad idea, but I would use it with a trailing stop on every grid order the reversed Martingale would open. 这样，, the grid orders would all close with a profit and so would the primary order.

It could be something like this:

Order 1: start protective stop at + x pips and open secondary order in the same direction with the same lot size.

Order 2: start protective stop at + x pips and open third order in the same direction with the same lotsize. Move the protective stop from order 1 by trailing etc….

Should the market reverse, then all orders would be stopped out by a trailing stop.

Could this work?

肖恩·奥弗顿 说

你好 Paul,

I’m not sure. Using bell curve (Gaussian) 统计, the idea would definitely fail. Markets, 然而, follow power law distributions. They are far more wild.

The turtle traders in the 1980s used a money management system that’s almost identical to what you described. I recommend that you Google Turtle Traders and read through the pdf floating around on the web. It’s a very interesting money management idea.

Shunmas 说

肖恩喜 !

Thanks for the great video. I really appreciate you proving the riskiness of Martingale system. Since you have that software/system using which you can test Martingale systems (and modified versions), can you please make a video on a martingale closing as basket of profit ?

例如, Open B1 0.01, if goes negative by 50 pips then open S1 0.03 and if S1 goes positive by 25 点子, it closes the whole run (both B1 and S1 all together as basket).

The example I gave you is a bit different from typical martingale because in typical martingale system, we experience the drawdown first. The example I gave, on the basis of pre-trade balance, there would be no drawdown in real.

Hope I have explained my example and point enough so as to make you understand the concept.

Looking forward to your new video. Thanks for being there. 🙂

Have a nice weekend.

肖恩·奥弗顿 说

Hi Shunmas,

Thank you for the helpful comment. Your basket idea is really just probability shifting. The worse that the situation gets, you’re trying to increase the probability of a profitable exit by moving the take profit closer.

There’s not a fundamental difference between this and Martingale because you are tripling the risk while increasing the chance of a profitable exit. The compounding risk problem still remains. My off the cuff expectation is that this approach would likely speed up an account blow up.

Shunmas 说

肖恩喜 !

谢谢你的回复. Yes you are absolutely right. Using the basket concept of trades closing with martingale is an absolute death run. But Shaun, lets assume, (AN EXAMPLE) if the account size is $5K and the leverage is 1000 (some brokers are offering this on micro account with the limit of 5 lots as maximum trade size per trade). Using 5K and 1000 leverage and trading the initial lot at 0.08 and multiplier of 2, and using this on GBPJPY pair, I don’t think we will blow our account. Or even assuming 0.04 initial lot, we will make profit. I do understand that we can’t make 500% in a year but still we can make 50% per year which is quite good a Return on Investment as compared to what is being offered at banks at the moment.

Your kind comments are highly appreciated as I feel really satisfied and having a feel of being educated by a true gentleman and professional. 🙂

谢谢.

Profound Regards,

Shunmas 🙂

约翰 · 说

肖恩喜

I used the Martingale Money Management system a while ago, and posted into a Forum that i’m using it. Then a Senior Trader which seems to have high experience wrote this:

“Don’t use Martingale, use the Kelly System instead”.

I googled about the Kelly Formula, which seems to be some formula to bet the optimal amount on horse races. However it’s not clear to me if this concept can be applied to Forex and if that’s even useful.

So my question is, could you write an article about the Kelly Formula which explains how it could be applied to Forex and if the formula is useful in any way? Would be great

Thanks Regards

约翰 ·

肖恩·奥弗顿 说

嘿，约翰,

谢谢你的建议 – that’s a great idea. I put the Kelly formula onto our publishing schedule for some time within the next month. Stay tuned!

gable 说

肖恩喜,

After loosing so much to martingale and other systems out there, you seem to know many strategies that doesn’t work. Kindly advise and encourage on the system that works instead.

谢谢

肖恩·奥弗顿 说

Hi Gable,

You can follow my live results at myfxbook.com/members/Quantbar

Mike Cleveland 说

哇, that myfxbook looks pretty bad. Have you given up that method? Have you found any other method of trading profitably?

肖恩·奥弗顿 说

It returned over 300%?!?!