Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Wording in warning #184

Closed
tankorsmash opened this issue Nov 20, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

Wording in warning #184

tankorsmash opened this issue Nov 20, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@tankorsmash
Copy link
Contributor

tankorsmash commented Nov 20, 2020

A SL/TP order would execute in the same bar as its contingent upon stop/limit order.

I think this is saying "a 'stop loss/take profit' order would execute in the same bar, as it's contingent upon a stop or limit order", but I am not quite sure. I keep trying to think of a better wording, but I can't come up with anything.

"A SL/TP order would execute in the same bar as its contingent upon "

"A SL/TP order would execute in the same bar as its contingent upon "
                            "stop/limit order. Since we can't assert the precise intra-candle "
                            "price movement, the affected SL/TP order will be executed on "
                            "the next (matching) price/bar, making the result (of this trade) "
                            "somewhat dubious. "
                            "See https://github.com/kernc/backtesting.py/issues/119",

Referenced issue #119

@kernc
Copy link
Owner

kernc commented Nov 23, 2020

How about parent?

@kernc kernc closed this as completed in f264bb5 Nov 24, 2020
@kernc
Copy link
Owner

kernc commented Nov 24, 2020

If you have better ideas, freely open a PR! 😄

@tankorsmash
Copy link
Contributor Author

Will do, thanks!

Goblincomet pushed a commit to Goblincomet/forex-trading-backtest that referenced this issue Jul 5, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants