OK, cool. When I ran these backtesting on the strategy builder, I'm still dumbfounded as to why I'm not getting results like yours or even anywhere close to it.
What have you done to your trading station in order for it to produce those results. I know you may probably already have the history data going back a far as 2004... but what else could you be doing that others might not be?
Is it the broker you're using? Because I don't think that would matter since the data is the same using same fx platform.
I've just upgraded to build 192.
Can you post a couple of your tests with the exact same settings as Newdigital so we can compare to see why you are getting different results.
Sure, will do... Give me a little while.. I'm in the middle of a few things right now, but as soon as I get the available time, sure - no problems.
More to follow.
I just visited this thread and Igorad created some good EA posted in this thread.
Now he improved his EA. He said to me: "I try to improve SimpleBreak...Expert by L.Williams systems. I have developed new version with calculation of Traders Power instead Daily Range."
This looks like a pretty powerful EA, where can I find out more about "Traders Power".
I will try backtesting this tonight when I get home from work.
Modeling quality should be 90%.
You know that I don't belive in backtesting.
Forward testing results is much more better.
But if we are talking about portfolio so we need to optimize the settings and backtest all new (not yet tested ) EAs. And modelling quality should be 90%.
Sure, I agree, but that's not what I asked though NewDigital... Why are you getting different results, every time you test a EA, I test it too, and you get far better results than I do. And I can't understand why this is so... And I was hoping that you could explain. I figured that if I have the same history data on all pair that you're testing on, the results should be exactly the same, but they aren't... So im thinking that either you've done something to the EA, or the MT4 platform... I've also noticed that you can change the balance on the strategy tester too, but mine's always at 10k.
Any insight to my questions would be appreciated.
Preset file tpe_h1_usdchf_1lot_nomm (attached).
1 lot size.
Every tick, modeling quality 90%,
since 06/07/2004 till 28/04/2006,
Profit factor 1.50.
Preset file tpe_h1_usdjpy_1lot_nomm (attached).
Every tick, modeling quality 89.99%,
Preset file tpe_h1_eurusd_1lot_nomm (attached).
Profit factor 1.67.
It is TradersPowerExpert_v1 H1 timeframe for EURUSD (pre-set file and backtesting results.
So what do we have?
1.1 H1 timeframe for EURUSD, GBPUSD, USDJPY and USDCHF.
1.2. M15 timeframe: GBPUSD.
1.1. H1 timeframe for the following pairs:
1.2. D1 timeframe:
Thus we need more for PriceChannelExpert_v4 D1 timeframe and for TradersPowerExpert_v1 M15.
Modelling quality should be not less than 90%. All your results are less than 90. That is why it is different.
I saw many backtesting results in public areas with modelling quality less than 90. It's ok if we want to promote some EA or strategy. But if we want to create portfolio so we need this 90%. Because some people may use our portfolios/sets with real money and it is very serious things.
When we are talking that some EA is good or bad so it is just a talking with some backtesting results.
When we are talking about portfolio so it is something different. We need 90%. We need it to start creation of these portfolios/sets.
All the backtesting results with less than 90% are not valid at all.
Hi newdigital, sorry for asking this, but I think TradersPower EA is base on daily range and no indicator, so do you think different time frame could give different result ? Thank you in advance
Yes you are right.
Because I am optimizing the settings and not looking on the backtesting statements.
Total trades are almost the same for H1 and m15 for this EA.
So we don't need to opitimize settings for M15 for TradersPower EA.
I will finish with PriceChannelExpert_v4 for D1 timeframe and then I have new EA from Igorad (new Step EA 1.45 version which looks very good), then we have some EA reacting on the news, then some Brainwashing 1d version and so on.