Davidke20 VS yeoeleven - Friendly match - page 6
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
Well after another MaxTrades5 hit the Dynamic Stop it appears that whilst I may have won our comp the results only show how dangerous these martingale EAs really are.
After being $25000 in profit I lost $14000 in the first MaxTrades hit then recovered slightly and got hit again dropping the profit down to $2100. Of course using MM has escalated that risk.
Using an agreed hands off approach has led to trading over all the news announcements and whilst 95% may help this type of EA there are a few that should be avoided and todays results will endorse that.
JohnAll this proves is that your leverage was dangerous...... not the martingale strategy. 15-20 pip spacing on the EURUSD which averages 80 pips volatility per day shows that you were at high risk to get max trades...... a lot.
That is not bad in and of itself. The big problem is trading 1.0 lots size or higher to start on a $25k account. My buddy runs a $1 million account live, and he starts each trade at .3 standard lots or 3 mini's. You were trading up to 5 times more leverage than he had, yet had 40 times smaller the account.
All this proves is your leverage means you won't be around to trade another day.
All this proves is that your leverage was dangerous...... not the martingale strategy. 15-20 pip spacing on the EURUSD which averages 80 pips volatility per day shows that you were at high risk to get max trades...... a lot.
That is not bad in and of itself. The big problem is trading 1.0 lots size or higher to start on a $25k account. My buddy runs a $1 million account live, and he starts each trade at .3 standard lots or 3 mini's. You were trading up to 5 times more leverage than he had, yet had 40 times smaller the account.
All this proves is your leverage means you won't be around to trade another day.I backtested this on a $1 mil account. It only returned about 6% per year, although the equity curve looked very nice. You'd make just as much money by putting that $1 mil in a certificate of deposit.
Lot size
All this proves is that your leverage was dangerous...... not the martingale strategy. 15-20 pip spacing on the EURUSD which averages 80 pips volatility per day shows that you were at high risk to get max trades...... a lot.
That is not bad in and of itself. The big problem is trading 1.0 lots size or higher to start on a $25k account. My buddy runs a $1 million account live, and he starts each trade at .3 standard lots or 3 mini's. You were trading up to 5 times more leverage than he had, yet had 40 times smaller the account.
All this proves is your leverage means you won't be around to trade another day.I totally agree but our comp rules were that MM1 Risk3 would be used and that is why the trades lot sizes were high.
So is the question that the MM only recognises the initial trade and not the subsequent ones allowing it to start off too high to allow for the progression?
If so is the use of MM on martingale EAs a dangerous option or is the actual coding of the MM to be questioned?
My choice would be to use .01 lotsize on a $1000 live account using one pair and only escalate after the account doubled.
John
I backtested this on a $1 mil account. It only returned about 6% per year, although the equity curve looked very nice. You'd make just as much money by putting that $1 mil in a certificate of deposit.
Not bad for one pair......... do it over a few pairs that are non-correlated and you are looking at a good return.
On 7 pairs that are not extrememly correlated or too volatile...... he's getting 6% not per year - but per month.
Not bad for one pair......... do it over a few pairs that are non-correlated and you are looking at a good return. On 7 pairs that are not extrememly correlated or too volatile...... he's getting 6% not per year - but per month.
N/M. I didn't backtest long enough. Only the first 6 months of 2006. 10point3 hit a rough patch in July and August of last year and wound up losing 5% by the end of the year.
N/M. I didn't backtest long enough. Only the first 6 months of 2006. 10point3 hit a rough patch in July and August of last year and wound up losing 5% by the end of the year.
BACKTEST dont real result. If test backtest and compare with forward test, result is very diferent.
toys toys ... strategy tester.
Funny - Those were actually some very good months for us.
Goes to show the backtester isn't all you may think it is.
BACKTEST dont real result. If test backtest and compare with forward test, result is very diferent. toys toys ... strategy tester.
You can't take a losing EA in backtest and expect it to make money live. Backtests may not be 100% accurate, but they give you a pretty good idea of how profitable a system can be. Those who don't share that opinion usually haven't forward tested long enough. This EA took several hits over that time period.
Those who trust anything about the MT4 backtester usually haven't forward tested long enough to know that it does not work anything close to real life.
And another thing - what target and pip step did you test? I can guarantee you that a 1 pip step would blow up immediately - yet a 500 pip steo would never blow up. Have you found the optimal risk parameters for the test you did before just randomly saying it doesn't work?
Final statements
The competition has now come to a close and I have posted two detailed statements.
The first was taken just prior to NFP at a position where normally I would have closed off manually.
The second taken after NFP as per our competition rules.
John