Which EA Builder Tool Is Best?

New comment
 

Hi,

I've stumbled upon <link removed> and <link removed>. I suspect there are even more EA building tools out there.

Which is best? Give your view here of which EA builder you prefer and why.

I'll start - Between the two I checked out, I preferred <link removed> for its simplicity. However, I had to omit 2 features/conditions for the EA I tried to build recently - Daylight Savings, and a particular implementation of a stop loss.

<link removed> looked like it may be able to handle the conditions/features I wanted to implement, but it was too complex for me.

Regards,

Marius

 

THis is a good thread, I have the same question. Only viewed <link removed> which seems to me also quite simple and therefore favorable.

Isn't there a comparison on the web somewhere?!

 

Marius Lombaard: I've stumbled upon <link removed>. I suspect there are even more EA building tools out there. Which is best? Give your view here of which EA builder you prefer and why.

I'll start - Between the two I checked out, I preferred <link removed> for its simplicity. However, I had to omit 2 features/conditions for the EA I tried to build recently - Daylight Savings, and a particular implementation of a stop loss.

<link removed> looked like it may be able to handle the conditions/features I wanted to implement, but it was too complex for me.

My personal opinion is "none", and the reason is simple! You will always end up needing to tweak the final code to do something specific which it is unable to do, and when that inevitable happens, you will have no alternative but to resort to coding it yourself or hiring someone to do it for you.

Besides, <link removed> generates old, obsolete code, riddled with bugs. You will also find many threads here of users requesting help to fix their generated code (especially <link removed> but also for <link removed>), which is promptly denied, because fixing the generated code would require re-coding the entire thing from scratch.

So, take my advice and learn to code MQL yourself and don't rely on code generators.

 
<link removed>, etc. are all the same. You will get something quick, but then you will spend a much longer time trying to get it right, than if you learned the language up front, and then just wrote it.
  • Since you haven't learned MQL4/5, therefor there is no common language for us to communicate.
    If we tell you what you need, you can't code it.
    If we give you the code, you don't know how to integrate it into yours.
    We are willing to HELP you when you post your attempt (using SRC) and the nature of your problem, but we are not going to debug your hundreds of lines of code. You are essentially going to be on your own.

  • <link removed> makes bad code counting up while closing multiple orders.
    <link removed> makes bad code Bars is unreliable (max bars on chart) volume is unreliable (miss ticks) Always use time. New candle - MQL4 forum
    <link removed> makes bad code, not adjusting for 4/5 digit brokers, TP/SL and slippage.
    <link removed> makes bad code, not adjusting for ECN brokers. (pre-Build 500)
    <link removed> makes bad code, not checking return codes.
    <link removed> uses objects on chart to save values - not persistent storage (files or GV+Flush.) No recovery (crash/power failure.)
 

I think <link removed> is pretty clever, and if I were going to use a builder it'd be that one. 

 
whroeder1:
<link removed>, MQL5 Wizard, etc. are all the same. You will get something quick, but then you will spend a much longer time trying to get it right, than if you learned the language up front, and then just wrote it.
  • Since you haven't learned MQL4/5, therefor there is no common language for us to communicate.
    If we tell you what you need, you can't code it.
    If we give you the code, you don't know how to integrate it into yours.
    We are willing to HELP you when you post your attempt (using SRC) and the nature of your problem, but we are not going to debug your hundreds of lines of code. You are essentially going to be on your own.

  • <link removed> makes bad code counting up while closing multiple orders.
    <link removed> makes bad code Bars is unreliable (max bars on chart) volume is unreliable (miss ticks) Always use time. New candle - MQL4 forum
    <link removed> makes bad code, not adjusting for 4/5 digit brokers, TP/SL and slippage.
    <link removed> makes bad code, not adjusting for ECN brokers. (pre-Build 500)
    <link removed> makes bad code, not checking return codes.
    <link removed> uses objects on chart to save values - not persistent storage (files or GV+Flush.) No recovery (crash/power failure.)
I think The Best And Honest Answer Which May Need Years To Find. :) Thanks For Your great Input. if You Can Suggest How I can learn To Code the MQL For Indicator And Creating EA Myself, I have HTML CSS And Basic JavaScript Ideas. I Used to do a little-bit editing on the pine code on trading-view, but that kind taking someone's strategy and do the matching with my one. If You can write a little bit about books/courses/resources then its would be great help
 
your brain, with Notepad software are predefined to specific function not for complex ea
 
Marius Lombaard:

Hi,

I've stumbled upon <link removed> and <link removed>. I suspect there are even more EA building tools out there.

Which is best? Give your view here of which EA builder you prefer and why.

I'll start - Between the two I checked out, I preferred <link removed> for its simplicity. However, I had to omit 2 features/conditions for the EA I tried to build recently - Daylight Savings, and a particular implementation of a stop loss.

<link removed> looked like it may be able to handle the conditions/features I wanted to implement, but it was too complex for me.

Regards,

Marius

Best builder for me should be MT4.

 
<link removed> saved my life so would say that. 
 

There is no comparison between <link removed> and <link removed>- <link removed> is very basic, very limited-

<link removed> is a work of genius that allows you to do almost anything you can think of.

I got both and while I might start something in <link removed> because its quicker and easier to understand, I inevitably end up re doing it on <link removed> as <link removed> cant do it. Simple stuff like risking a fixed $ amount or TP at a multiple of risk ea builder cant do but is easy in <link removed>.

<link removed> takes a bit of getting used to, but everytime i get frustrated with it, I keep thinking about how to make it do what I want and eventually find a solution that works.

one good thing about ea builder is you can make indicators. having said this, I haven't found indicators to be useful in generating consistent profits

 

I use < name removed > for more than 3 months and I am pretty satisfied about consistency and functionality.

I do not subscribe to < name removed > these EA builders provide very fast deployments. You can build and test an idea in minutes/hours and if you think it is viable (and needs complex implementation), you can code or hire a coder for a fully functional, detailed EA. EA builders are very  useful in that sense.

1234
New comment
Reason: