What are the most important factors in a social trading signal? - page 3
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
True is that it is NOT possible to rise balance from only 1 USD. But it is YES possible to rise balance from at least 10 USD, and with anything higher like 25, 50, 100, 500, is increasingly comfortable. If you make effort and pick up quick small wins, it is possible to start with as low as 10 USD. EAs should be theoretically even more successfull in this tactics, because they can put stop loss at break-even plus few pips level much faster than human can do. And also machines are never tired and sleepy. So no problem to win at any time each trading day. That is not possible for human, but EA should be able to do it much faster and accurate, without emotions and without bias.
Why are you thinking it's possible with balance starting at 10USD ? Why not 1USD or 100USD ?
With 100 USD it is surely possible. I said that everything above 10 USD is increasingly comfortable. ... But if you trade 0.5 lot or more, it will kill you even when you have 500 USD. Any higher size than 0.03 is increasingly hazardeous. 0.2 and more only in exceptional sure wins.
1 USD is insufficient in all cases. Initial drawdown due to spread fee and any smallest direction change will kill you. Actually, I believe, it will not be possible to even open any trade at all.
For 10 USD is enough only if you have high leverage 500-3000 ... this allows you open and hold 0.01 and 0.02 positions even with 10usd only capital.
Yeah I agree that it's possible, I just do-not think its very probable. For every 10K winner, theres probably 1000 other losers attempting the same thing.
Yeah I agree that it's possible, I just do-not think its very probable. For every 10K winner, theres probably 1000 other losers attempting the same thing.
With 100 USD it is surely possible. I said that everything above 10 USD is increasingly comfortable. ... But if you trade 0.5 lot or more, it will kill you even when you have 500 USD. Any higher size than 0.03 is increasingly hazardeous. 0.2 and more only in exceptional sure wins.
1 USD is insufficient in all cases. Initial drawdown due to spread fee and any smallest direction change will kill you. Actually, I believe, it will not be possible to even open any trade at all.
For 10 USD is enough only if you have high leverage 500-3000 ... this allows you open and hold 0.01 and 0.02 positions even with 10usd only capital.
In my opinion anything below 100$ needs a lot of chance and it's more gambling than trading. Why ? Say we are trading EURUSD, so 0.01 lot is 0.1$ per pip (0.0001). With a stoploss of 10 pips, that means you are risking 1$ per trade, it's a reasonable risk of 1%. But that needs a strategy with an average stoploss of 10 pips, it's far from easy. If you have a more standard strategy with an average stoploss between 10-100pips you need up to 1000$.
Yes. Nobody is saying that is easy. But main suggestion I tried to place in this topic was merely to encourage developers to "teach" their programs to cope with small accounts, and I specifically defined how small is small-enough, teach them to struggle in each market invironment. No matter how many trades per day (perhaps 10 or more), but if such EA is capable to make sustainable 1% of balance rise per trading day, it would be absolutelly super. Simply I think that with 10,000 USD starting capital could be profitable every EA and Trading signal, even dumb one. It is not real test. It cannot be thouroughly measured under such normal conditions. Right program must be able to survive and make positive results in dificult conditions too.
In my opinion anything below 100$ needs a lot of chance and it's more gambling than trading. Why ? Say we are trading EURUSD, so 0.01 lot is 0.1$ per pip (0.0001). With a stoploss of 10 pips, that means you are risking 1$ per trade, it's a reasonable risk of 1%. But that needs a strategy with an average stoploss of 10 pips, it's far from easy. If you have a more standard strategy with an average stoploss between 10-100pips you need up to 1000$.
Agreed.
Yes. Nobody is saying that is easy. But main suggestion I tried to place in this topic was merely to encourage developers to "teach" their programs to cope with small accounts, and I specifically defined how small is small-enough, teach them to struggle in each market invironment. No matter how many trades per day (perhaps 10 or more), but if such EA is capable to make sustainable 1% of balance rise per trading day, it would be absolutelly super. Simply I think that with 10,000 USD starting capital could be profitable every EA and Trading signal, even dumb one. It is not real test. It cannot be thouroughly measured under such normal conditions. Right program must be able to survive and make positive results in dificult conditions too.
Its one thing to ask for the holy-grail and another thing to achieve it. Any experience developer will quickly notice that price movements within 10_pips is generally random. The market non-random (aka trend) movements becomes evident upon longer distances and time-frames. When looking for SL within 10_pips, Spreads takes up a larger percentage of your risk. Any stop-loss less than 20_pips and you'll have more fun playing casino roulette. Slippage would also become a bigger factor. The strategy tester from both mt4 and mt5 would be useless against such strategies because a larger number of trades would open and close within a minute_bar.
1% returns per day is also holy_grail numbers. Looking for any %numbers per day as performance benchmark just add more pressure to an already stressful activity. Institution traders set annual benchmarks. Most of them even have a losing year every now and then. If someone can do above 30% returns per year constantly with low draw-downs, he/she might have a resume for a money-manager. This idea of turning $100 into $10,000 with low draw-down is always welcome by all. But anyone who could do this without luck, could easily turn $10,000 into a Billion in record time.
It doesn't matter if you're using $10000000000 or $100 during your development process. What will matter is the Relative_Drawdown in Dollars. If the RelativeDD$ for a test using $100,000 = $1. Then $100 (with appropriate leverages) would be sufficient for trading the strategy also. Another way of saying it is, if you test a strategy with $100 and get a RelDD$ of $1, that means this same strategy would be 1000_times safer for someone with $100,000. Which also means that someone with $100,000 can take 1000x the lot_size as someone with $100. <-- if 100k cannot do this, then 100Bucks is also dreaming.
Agree with everything you said, but main thing is your citation here. .....
... strategy must adapt to account size. forex robots or signals should not trade USD100 account as if would be USD100,000.
From my observation, it seems to me the main factor who leads to choose a signal is "high reward potential". I don't think a poll on the forum is representative of the mass of subscribers.