Is it possible to keep %risk fixed when adjusting SL on a pending order?

Post Reply
atradni
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2023 4:59 pm

Is it possible to keep %risk fixed when adjusting SL on a pending order?

Post by atradni »

As the title says I am using pending orders. I adjust my SL or entry level if my pending order does not get filled on the next candle. When I do that the lot size stays constant, which changes my overall risk per trade. I would like to keep the risk per trade constant. Is there any way to do this other than cancelling the pending order and putting in a new one? This somewhat defies the purpose of adjusting SL and order entry through the UI unfortunately... Hopefully there is a solution to this because it is annoying as heck to always delete the pending order since sometimes I have to wait a couple of candles before I can enter. I could allow for going back and deleting candles but I want to avoid a look-ahead bias.
Khan
Posts: 137
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:21 am

Re: Is it possible to keep %risk fixed when adjusting SL on a pending order?

Post by Khan »

I agree with your suggestion; that would be a time saver.

This is a feature request by the way (not a question).
j3rgus
Posts: 56
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2022 10:40 pm

Re: Is it possible to keep %risk fixed when adjusting SL on a pending order?

Post by j3rgus »

Hello, depending on your requirements of SL and Entry levels you can create a rule with set up expiration. This way the pending order will cancel automatically and you can use default rules with key shortcuts to enter new pending orders with required level. This might not solve your problem of avoid cancelling and opening new pending orders but it can speed up the process.
atradni
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2023 4:59 pm

Re: Is it possible to keep %risk fixed when adjusting SL on a pending order?

Post by atradni »

Hmm. Unfortunately I cannot use rules for entry like this because my approach is to a degree discretionary, so I am doing manual backtesting. Long-term I plan on testing the system out algorithmically but for now that is not an option. I will place a feature request in the corresponding sub-forum. Just wanted to check first whether I missed something or not. Cheers and thanks for the reponses
Post Reply