# Silly Qns On Optimization Report

434

## What the Numbers in the Expert Testing Report Mean

But I still cant get rid of these overly silly but almost disturbing questions, so hope pls bear with them. It about the report below.

After pulling off this 1+ year optimization, as you can see in column Profit factor, Pass 3 achieved a whopping 193.64,!!! yet Pass 5,4 with Profit Factor NIL gets the top two spots in terms of overall balance. So my first question is:

1) What happens to first and runner-up profit Factor? How can it be possible Zero?

My next question is, why is Pass 3 Profit Factor so huge? The article wrote ProfitFactor = GrossProfit / GrossLoss. To me, this is really important result. 193 mean for every \$193 bucks gained, it lost ONLY \$1 buck. So the silly question is: Is all this for real?

17400

diostar:

1) What happens to first and runner-up profit Factor? How can it be possible Zero?

My next question is, why is Pass 3 Profit Factor so huge? The article wrote ProfitFactor = GrossProfit / GrossLoss. To me, this is really important result. 193 mean for every \$193 bucks gained, it lost ONLY \$1 buck. So the silly question is: Is all this for real?

I assume that for passes 5, 4 and 6 there were no losses so the Gross Loss is zero, rather than showing a Divide by Zero error ;-) a result of 0.00 is shown. For run 3 there was a Gross Loss but it was very small so GrossProfit / GrossLoss gives a high figure.

The numbers I look at are Profit, Total Trades (I want a reasonable sample set) and Drawdown %age

434

RaptorUK:

I assume that for passes 5, 4 and 6 there were no losses so the Gross Loss is zero, rather than showing a Divide by Zero error ;-) a result of 0.00 is shown. For run 3 there was a Gross Loss but it was very small so GrossProfit / GrossLoss gives a high figure.

The numbers I look at are Profit, Total Trades (I want a reasonable sample set) and Drawdown %age

Say, presumably passer 5,4,6 bagged ZERO losses, hence, tester has to apply that 0.00 "cosmetics" in their profit factor result, then, my silly qn is:

why didn't they apply the same 0.00 cosmetic result in their expected payoff?

The article pointed out:

17400

diostar:

Say, presumably passer 5,4,6 bagged ZERO losses, hence, tester has to apply that 0.00 "cosmetics" in their profit factor result, then, my silly qn is:

why didn't they apply the same 0.00 cosmetic result in their expected payoff?

434

that makes sense.

"The graph of profit of all passes is drawn automatically in the "Optimization Graph" tab. The graph allows to estimate the profitability of the use of different inputs combinations visually. The graph representing the amount of profitable (green color) and unprofitable (red color) trades at each pass is given in the bottom of the window, as well."

I didn't see any green or red. Have you seen those before?

All I saw a blue graph like the one in the picture.

17400

I have seen a chart made up of squares where each squares represents a pass . . . I'm not sure if all Brokers offer it . . . I much prefer the line chart as you have shown.

What I have seen is similar to this . . .