Daytrading5

New comment

[Deleted] 2006.10.12 13:30

Hi everyone! I'd like to share with you this EA I found somewhere outside this forum...

Backtests results show some potencial but I'm planning to forward test it in a few pairs.

First off I'd be glad if someone can help me add MM option to the code.

Thx

Files:

daytrading5.mq4 10 kb

strategytester_2.htm 111 kb

strategytester.gif 6 kb

Sergey Golubev 2006.10.12 16:09 #1

As I understand from the code this EA is operating on the open bar. So backtesting is not reliable. Forward testing only.

barrys 2006.10.12 20:57 #2

Newdigital,

This is a concept I don't understand yet. I see what you mean, the code uses Open prices, eg,

macdHistCurrent = iMACD(NULL,0,12,26,9,PRICE_OPEN,MODE_MAIN,0);

The Open price of a bar is fixed though, it doesn't change, so I'm surprised that the use of Open price means it won't backtest accurately. Can someone please explain this?

Thanks,

TesterHideIndicators ChartIndicatorAdd iMACD

Sergey Golubev 2006.10.13 05:11 #3

barry:
Newdigital,

This is a concept I don't understand yet. I see what you mean, the code uses Open prices, eg,

macdHistCurrent = iMACD(NULL,0,12,26,9,PRICE_OPEN,MODE_MAIN,0);

The Open price of a bar is fixed though, it doesn't change, so I'm surprised that the use of Open price means it won't backtest accurately. Can someone please explain this?

Thanks,

It may be backtested but on the open prices mode only. But sorry I am not fully believe in backtesting especially in "open prices" mode so it is better to forward test it.

It was big scandal about two years ago. I will describe now.

it was some programmer two year ago (as i remember he was Russian). He was selling the EAs (not source codes). People were buying because his EAs were backtested very great. EAs backtested very fantastic. Many other programmers were trying to recognize: "why?". Because there is competition between them you know. And they discovered: he coded all his EAs on the open bar (current open bar). That is why the EAs backtested very good but in reality ... you understand.

And many people when they see some EA asking the question first: "this EA is operating on the open or close bar?".

And now almost all programmers when they coded something on the open bar so they will tell it first: "look, it is my EA but I coded it on the open bar".

You may ask: "but what happened with this Russian programmer?". Nothing. He is not a member of our forum yet but he is famous programmer and he is still coding on the open bar. Because he said that he is having some threory and so on and he will always code on the open bar. You may find him in Metaquotes website (www. mql4. com) as a coder of some EAs (on the open bar of course).

So it was a story.

But the situation is changing now. As I know some financial funds are using EAs coded on the open bar. So this kind of coding is not bad. It's ok. But it should be mentioned of course. Otherwise people may be confused.

Time management in the Initialization Statements, code blocks, and

Libor Siman 2006.10.13 12:57 #4

barrys 2006.10.14 22:40 #5

Thanks Newdigital for that description. I think the real problem occurs when an EA uses Price_Close in indicators, but then buys on Open, i.e., if the close gives a buy signal, go back in time and buy on the Open of that same candle. That's clearly cheating. I don't think Daytrading5 is guilty of that, because the indicators are based on Open prices. But I'm not sure, it may still be cheating, I can't tell. In any case, it's strange to base indicators on Open, and you do wonder why a programmer would do that.

Momentum - Oscillators - Momentum - Oscillators - Momentum - Oscillators -