Signals. Account monitoring. - page 7
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
That's not what I mean. If you are not publicly flipping the account in terms of equity, but the balance at the time of publication is equal to the initial one (i.e. all positions are blocked). After the publication, the traps are smoothly closed, thus increasing the yield. And close the lots at such a speed, so that the "smart" monitor did not say that too high a yield in a short period of time (or whatever he says)...
Accounts with short monitoring periods, in general, are worthy only observation. There is no point in talking about them.
Accounts with a short monitoring period, in general, are worthy only of observation. There is no point in talking about them.
What does monitoring time have to do with it? Well, it's possible to keep lots open longer. It's okay to keep them open for a year. That's not the issue. The question is the principle of cheating itself.
And by the way, you still haven't answered the question itself (whether you can publish). And your opinion about what is important in the context of this question is not really relevant:)
What does monitoring time have to do with it? Well, it's possible to keep lots open longer. It's okay to keep them open for a year. That's not the issue. The question is the principle of cheating itself.
And by the way, you still haven't answered the question itself (whether you can publish). And your opinion on what is important in the context of this question is not really relevant:)
There's a little mystery. The longer you put your equity under fire ("put it on the market", open a position and stay in it...), the faster you will get out.
"Signals that do not control equity (have open positions frequently and for a long time) are doomed a priori. Those that don't keep equity "open" for long are doomed a posteriori. Huh)
The signal itself with open positions, any, you can upload to the site, yes.
There's a little secret. The longer you put your equity under fire ("put it on the market", open a position and stay in it...), the sooner you'll go bust.
"Signals that do not control equity (have open positions frequently and for a long time) are doomed a priori. Those who don't keep their equity "open" for a long time are doomed a posteriori. Huh)
The signal itself with open positions, any, you can upload to the site, yes.
In case you didn't understand, I'm talking about non-public overflow and publishing an account with a locked position. Equity is not "under fire". On swaps, it's thick on swaps, of course :).
It's basically all about the fact that monitoring returns on closed trades is inherently flawed. They are not only stimulating overpricing, but also some schemes that may be picked up.
In case you didn't understand, I'm talking about non-public overflow and publishing an account with blocked positions. Equity is not "under fire". On swaps, of course, it's all in the air:).
It's basically all about the fact that monitoring returns on closed trades is inherently flawed. If you do not know what to do and what to expect, you may pick up some schemes.
In this case, the trader needs to know how to solve the problem of "good trading" (in terms of making profit, of course). And not to invent schemes. ;)
I think it makes sense to set a goal of "trading well" (in terms of making a profit, of course). Not to invent schemes... ;)
I agree, it's better to be rich and healthy... :)
I'm just trying to draw attention to the inferiority of profitability calculated on the basis of closed trades.
Here in the kitchens I understand why flawed ratings/monitoring are done. Not so much here... :).