Topic: Closing at Open vs closing at Close
We found a bug in the MT backtester several months ago. The bug is that when MT tester interpolates bars in the so called “Every tick” method, it doesn’t actually do this correctly. It misses to emit tick near to the end of a bar. As a result of the bug a strategy that should close a position at Bar Closing closes it at the next Open.
This bug appears only in the “Every tick” mode. If we use “Control points” the MT works fine by closing the positions at the end of the same bar:
I know you – the experienced traders in this community do not care of the MT tests, but many traders swear by the MT tester. I am afraid that every time when there is a difference between MT tests and FSB tests the majority of the traders take the MT side. They also don’t believe that there is a bug in the tester and fully trust the MT’s ambiguous “tick” tester.
What can we do in that case?
1. To continue this unequal and doomed fight for the truth.
2. To change our model and to start closing positions at the next bar opening.
How we can change to closing at open price:
1. The change will affect only the closing logic conditions of FSB.
2. The Closing Logic Conditions indicators will use UPBV (“Use Previous Bar Value”) option on when the indicator is based on price different than Open (the majority of the indicators).
3. If we have closing at the end of the day on Friday, it may happen at Bar Closing.
Our current EAs close at a predefined number of seconds before the expected bar Close. The default number is 15 seconds, but it is adjustable from the EAs Input screen in MT. This also adds some deviation from an eventual backtest on the new data. By closing at Bar Opening we will have an exact match between the real trade and the backtest.
I need your advice for that question – is it deserve the time and effort to develop a concept proof model that will close positions at next Bar Opening?