Rating System of Trading Signals Improved
We have revised the rating system of MetaTrader 4 and MetaTrader 5 trading signals. Now, the system considers the signal's quality based on the trust of its subscribers. Thus, the more subscribers connect to the signal, the more credibility it has. As a result, the rating of such signal will be higher. The rating system will be the same both for paid and free signals.
Considering that sorting by quality will be enabled by default, signals having higher credibility will become more noticeable. However, trading signals can still be sorted out by growth, number of subscribers, price and other parameters for more convenience.
We hope that the new rating system will simplify your search for the appropriate trading signals.
Signals are a total mis if it wont work like a normal ea
you can not close others people's trades !
find this realy very very poor
Signals are a total mis if it wont work like a normal ea
you can not close others people's trades !
find this realy very very poor
Signals are a total mis if it wont work like a normal ea
you can not close others people's trades !
find this realy very very poor
My thoughts are to follow the signals generated by the EA that's supplying them, mirroring the automated system, winners and loosers, one picks out the system that is suitable (normally the most profitable and lets it "run" their account.
Only a remark : A signal isn't obligatory from an EA.
Ang, could you expand? Wansi has commented that you cannot close other peoples trades, why would you want to close a trade if you are following a signal provider? In the section on the providers page we see a break down of how it has performed, the user has to take allot of things into consideration before jumping in, I would put money on what they see is a chart going at 45* straight up, I remember buying an EA and creating one that made a huge amount of money with no losses but the downfall was no stop loss, it would trade until it made a profit, trades could go on for months, one rule in trading or researching should be "whats the maximum in any one trade from past history I could loose", if this cannot be answered, or proved then then you could loose you total capital.
No EA or signal can be 100%, I may be challenged on this, but it may have been in the past but the past is just that, entering into trading via signals,EA or manual, you have to expect losses, this brings me back to the start, why would anyone subscribed to a signal provider, want to close a trade?
Signals should just be Signals. It shouldn't Open nor Close trades for people. If Signals performs trading, then whats the purpose of Expert Advisors.
*I don't have personal experience with mt_Signals.
*mt_Signals could very well be placing orders for people.
For me, a good trading signals rating system must focus in protect the subscribers against themselves.
In practice, each investor has their own formula for selecting trading signals, and that is very complex since the signals are black boxes.
So, in my opinion, consider that the more subscribers connect to the signal, the more credibility it has, is a mistake.
If the signal loose performance and is free it will be very slow to rating system detect this, since most of the subscribers don't change so fast.
Leave these signals just because subscribers information with higher scores will encourage the use of a strategy that is no longer aligned with the market.
In this sense, my suggestions to protect the subscribers are improve terminal sort options (for instance include profit factor, expected payoff, etc) and create a rating formule that balances performance and other main factors, like number of trades, time in the market, growth, profit factor, recovery factor, etc.
Yes, every strategy is a Black Box. And our rating is based on people voting - yes, they are voting with their money when subscribing to a signal. This means that in most cases, they have analyzed the signal with all the details before subscription. In the end if you have the more subscribers than other provider, you will get a better position because of more people trust you.
In this sense, my suggestions to protect the subscribers are improve terminal sort options (for instance include profit factor, expected payoff, etc) and create a rating formule that
balances performance and other main factors, like number of trades,
time in the market, growth, profit factor, recovery factor, etc.
Yes, every strategy is a Black Box. And our rating is based on people voting - yes, they are voting with their money when subscribing to a signal. This means that in most cases, they have analyzed the signal with all the details before subscription. In the end if you have the more subscribers than other provider, you will get a better position because of more people trust you.
The sorting option based on much more params is a good idea, we already planned to implement it.Lenar,
You guys are off to a great start, and I applaud your efforts. In six or so months you have almost 2000 signal systems competing for the top spots: MT5 Real ~100 MT5 Demo ~250 MT4 Real ~880 MT4 Demo ~700.
I have much experience running signals on some other big signal services, and so I will give you my observations.
Adding your own ranking is a great step in the right direction. I think having the number of subscribers as one of your metrics is GOOD. You then have an army of people analyzing signals and "voting with their pocketbook."
At the same time, Figurelli is correct that new subscribers don't always know what is best for their accounts. We have all been "newbies." One provider may have huge "negative excursions" on each trade, but the graph is a solid 45%. So they all pile on and you get a false positive feedback loop ranking that completely ignores risk. So please include other metrics as well as number of subscribers.
Here are some additional metrics to consider if you haven't already:
1. How good are the entries? Because of spread they all start out negative, but how far negative to they go on average? The performance graph does not show per-trade negative excursion. This would be a perfect instant way for subscribers to see risk. (Consider adding it to the graph!) Of course you can then include this factor in your metric: "Average negative excursion." You must record the "low" for each trade to do this. You may already be doing it. If so, this would also be a GREAT thing to show on the table of open and closed trades as well.
2. How good are the exits? Along the same lines, I would add a metric for how many pips they "left on the table". You must record the high water mark of each trade. You could then take the average and compare that to the average pips/trade profit.
3. What is the average trade time vs. the profit? Shorter is better in my opinion because it doesn't leave you exposed to the whims of the market as long, however, certain swing strategies can be highly profitable. So just compare them based on PIPS/HOUR (while trade is open of course) or something like that.
4. How many maximum and average open trades are there? I think 1 trade is better than 10! But again, it depends on the profitability and safety. Compare these systems based on pips/position.
5. Position size as a function of % of the account at risk compared to reward. Risk:reward. Easy, but important.
6. Monthly growth. You have total growth as a sorting option, but it is practically meaningless because it has no comparative time frame. You already capture the monthly growth, so use this in your algorithm, but please do one more thing: Change the sort feature on the filter from total growth to monthly growth (please.)
7. Sharpe/Sortino ratio. Sharpe is a great metric you already have. But here is a twist to consider. SORTINO. This is exactly the same as Sharpe, but does not penalize volatility in the positive direction. If a trader knows how to profit from spikes, then don't mark him down.
8. Profit factor & Recovery factor. Great metrics.
Thanks for providing this great service.
Lenar,
5. Position size as a function of % of the account at risk compared to reward. Risk:reward. Easy, but important.
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
We have revised the rating system of MetaTrader 4 and MetaTrader 5 trading signals. Now, the system considers the signal's quality based on the trust of its subscribers. Thus, the more subscribers connect to the signal, the more credibility it has. As a result, the rating of such signal will be higher. The rating system will be the same both for paid and free signals.
Considering that sorting by quality will be enabled by default, signals having higher credibility will become more noticeable. However, trading signals can still be sorted out by growth, number of subscribers, price and other parameters for more convenience.
We hope that the new rating system will simplify your search for the appropriate trading signals.