NM aparently ignores manual spread size

Post Reply
martinboye
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2022 2:59 pm

NM aparently ignores manual spread size

Post by martinboye »

Hi,

I cannot seem to get NM to use the spread I have defined myself.

In the data center for EURUSD in this case, the spread is defined to "1". (screenshot 01)

When setting up the backtest, the "Use real spread" is unticked. (screenshot 01)

Yet, NM adds the real variable spread to buy market orders, but not sell market orders. (screenthot 02)

Also For sell market orders, NM doesn't add any spread at all, which I assume is also a bug. (screenthot 03)

I would like NM to respect the spread defined in the data center. What am I missing?

Kr,
Martin
Attachments
03 Short Screenshot 2022-12-29 at 10.01.46.png
03 Short Screenshot 2022-12-29 at 10.01.46.png (389.51 KiB) Viewed 1668 times
02 Long Screenshot 2022-12-29 at 09.52.23.png
02 Long Screenshot 2022-12-29 at 09.52.23.png (390.51 KiB) Viewed 1668 times
01 Backtest Setup Screenshot 2022-12-29 at 09.47.59.png
01 Backtest Setup Screenshot 2022-12-29 at 09.47.59.png (98.32 KiB) Viewed 1668 times
j3rgus
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: NM aparently ignores manual spread size

Post by j3rgus »

Hello.
Yet, NM adds the real variable spread to buy market orders, but not sell market orders. (screenthot 02)
The default line you see on charts is the Bid. When you buy you have to make sure you add the spread so it matches with what you see on the chart. When you sell this is already incorporated in what you see on the chart so you do not add spread.
Also For sell market orders, NM doesn't add any spread at all, which I assume is also a bug. (screenthot 03)
From the screenthot 03 I can see that just after you sold you had negative growth which seems to correspond to the spread. So the spread was added to the order.

About the enabled vs. disabled real spread I suppose there is some bug - I experienced some inconsistency about it too. I also experienced some more extreme cases which I created a bug issue for here.
TradingHeroes
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed May 04, 2022 9:45 pm

Re: NM aparently ignores manual spread size

Post by TradingHeroes »

I noticed that if you set the spread manually, it doesn't display at the bottom of the screen next to the timezone and profit/loss.
martinboye
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2022 2:59 pm

Re: NM aparently ignores manual spread size

Post by martinboye »

Dear Hugh (assuming it's Hugh from TradingHeroes :) )

Thanks for replying and for sharing your observation.

After setting the manual spread in the Data Center, I recently noticed that this value is respected on all timeframes above and including H4.

However, NM switches to real spread on all other timeframes. It doesn't matter what pair or what broker it is, or if you start your backtest on one timeframe and later switch to another in the same backtest.

Further, it is not possible to set the manual spread to zero and decimal numbers. @NakedMarkets, this would be really nice :)
Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2022 3:03 pm

Re: NM aparently ignores manual spread size

Post by Admin »

Hello,

Thanks for reporting this issue.
For information, this is normal that the spread is added only on the long orders, as explained by j3rgus.
The financial markets are working this way. There are always 2 prices at any moment : the bid and the ask.
By convention, on the charts (tradingview and Metatrader), this is the bid. But you can display the ask in the chart properties.

Here there was a bug occuring when specific GMTs were used, the manual spread value was not used.
It has been fixed in the latest version.

About the spread set to 0, it's possible to do it. However, your backtest will not be reliable, does it ?
There is always spread on any market. It's highly likely that a strategy will work without any spread but will not on live account.
martinboye
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2022 2:59 pm

Re: NM aparently ignores manual spread size

Post by martinboye »

Hi Admin,

Thanks for fixing the GMT bug. And also, I agree - it doesn't make sense to backtest with a spread of zero. Don't know what I was thinking :)
Post Reply