Globis forex - page 17
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
And to top it off the RAS habit of opening positions as they come BACK into range (sometimes months later) is pushing my limits - especially with this signal because of its fondness on holding positions
How is possible that RS can let us catch trades that were submitted months ago. I read about these problems in other forums and yet I still $%^&*()%$^&*&^%$
So, according to this post RAS also needs to be seller's nanny an close his positions because he forgets to do? Or because his demo expired and is unable to do so?
Opening stale positions
So, according to this post RAS also needs to be seller's nanny an close his positions because he forgets to do? Or because his demo expired and is unable to do so?
Are you suggesting the sellers demo has expired and he is unable to close positions in this case ? I think not ! The seller is very aware of the positions and discusses them on occasion - they remain intentionally, allthough they were NOT AWARE of the RAS ea opening them after such protracted periods.
I have had this discussion with newdigital before and he just stated that it was a conscious design decision without offering any justification other than to match the buyers with the sellers portfolio as closely as practical.
The problem is that in most (or all i can think of) cases this logic is plain wrong - if there really was some justification in some cases there should be an option in the RAS ea - say a period beyond which a signal would no longer be used - defaulting to infinity for all i care - as long as i can set a min of, for example, 1 day.
In this case the positions are not left around because they are lazy, but as a conscious decision because the signal provider has decided that fundamentals will likely bring the position back into profitability and historically the policy has proved to be successful - you may therefore transfer the responsibilty to the signal provider. The seller's choice may or not be the "right" decision but the buyer should have the right to choose when he starts to receive signals.
My complaint is that:
1. It is intentional, yet undocumented
2. No realistic justification is given for its existence
3. The buyer should have a choice - say as a RAS ea parameter
4. In most cases i think a seller would not choose to re-open a position if the original setup conditions no longer existed. If a position open and dropped 100 pips i understand giving it a chance to return - since the pain had already been accepted. The position is not always retained as part of a "hold and hope" policy but as a carefully balanced overall consideration.
Many believe (as i do) that stale positions should never be re-instated after a certain period. There are circumstances when it is a good idea - ie when it is part of hedged portfolio, but in those (rare) circumstances the position SHOULD BE OPENED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. This is not a fashion show - i am sure buyers could accept some prices being better than the sellers.
Please can you offer a single rational argument to support the current behaviour in order to justify the pain - I am willing to accept any offering gracefully.
If the RAS ea developers really cared they would enter into a discussion instead of merely writing off buyers (and sellers i understand) in a rather rude manner, as they have.
Please can you offer a single rational argument to support the current behaviour in order to justify the pain - I am willing to accept any offering gracefully.
If the RAS ea developers really cared they would enter into a discussion instead of merely writing off buyers (and sellers i understand) in a rather rude manner, as they have.This is not aimed at the providers of the Globis signal but at RAS staff - I am not sure who is RAS and who is TSD, but believe Linuxser has interests so my response is specifically direct at him - i post on this signal because people are suffering due to various RAS "artifacts" that are not even bugs but intentional features.
Also, policies implemented in the RAS ea preclude any form of practical investgations of suspected bugs so reports to RAS develoment staff are "not possible" to investigate (truncated log files being so small that they are overwritten almost immediately) - a good example is a eur/chf from another signal (Rdp/Rtl) was closed prematurely late last week - yet it still exists on RAS db and was not closed by sl, tp or manually - i can see it in ea logs but RAS log "evidence" has been overwritten - as usual
I also got two partial closes hanging over from another signal (Rocketman) - should be closed by now since original positions closed earlier on friday - other activity has been fine - evidence "overwritten" as usual
Do keep in mind that a large part of the time the system works, so its not a gross setup problem - its just that RAS is unreliable and the RAS ea has barriers that preclude any reasonable investigation.
I have been presented with one option repeatedly - to vote with my feet
Perhaps i should !
Hi ianj,
RAS log file is overwriting because many members asked for that in the beginning: when it is 2 Mb so it is overwriting.
It is very quickly to be 2 MB ... sometimes just 2 days.
As to Globis so I looked at the signal and at my clone - some drawdown on open trades now. We can see for ore when stats will be refreshed on Monday.
Using the clone feature - it is possible to check the vendors about how their signals are performing for the buyers.
As some people asked so it is what I have about this signal.
As the RAS stats are for 3 months max so I just downloaded the trades from RAS database (as excel file).
It is with lot multiplier = 1, initial deposit = 5,000:
Most big drawdown was 2 times - you can see it from the image above.
1 time:
It is second time:
Please note that it was with lot multiplier = 1.
And it is with lot multiplier = 0.1:
As we see - with lot multiplier = 0.1 the max floating drawdown is no more then 300 or 400 dollars.
It was the performance of the vendor (from RAS recorded).
And for now - the clone.
Clone of this signal.
Clone is automatic buyer: I am buyer of this signal and I am sending the performance from my Metatrader back to RAS.
It is the performance of the buyer of this signal.
I am not closing anything manually. I just attached RAS EA to Alpari UK Metatrader chart as a buyer of this signal.
So, it is what I have:
It was with lot multiplier = 1. As we see - the max floating drawdown was about 4,000 dollars. And it was 2 times for me. For now: about 2,300 dollars - we can see:
Please note that I started this clone not from the beginning.
If I use lot multiplier = 0.1 (I have 1 but just in case - I will have 0.1) so my performance will be the following:
As we see from the above image (buyer of this Globis with lot multiplier = 0.1): ROI = 44% in case of 5,000 deposit (it means that I should have 7,225 for 1 year with starting 5,000 dollars initial deposit).
If I start with 1,000 dollars deposit and lot multiplier = 0.1 so I will have the following:
So, in this case my 1,000 initial deposit will grow as 3,225 dollars for 1 year. And max floating drawdown will be no more then 400 dollars.
But this signal will cost me 99 dollars in a month. For 1 year = 1,188.
In case of lot multiplier = 0.1: I will have 2,225 as a profit.
2,225 - 1,188 = 1,037....
So, I think - initial deposit should be more then 1,000 with lot multiplier more then 0.1 just for sure.
It was the performance of the buyer of this signal (clone of this signal). I am having same errors with everybody and I did not close anything manually.
------------
If someone need same (or more detailed) analysis for any other signal - let me know. But I will need to instal the clone first. Because I am sorry but any analysis of the vendor's performance without the performance of the buyer/clone is nothing.
As for clone for any signal and I will instal it.
If lot multiplier = 1 so I should have 22,259 dollars for 1 year as a profit. But drawdown will be more then 2,000 dollars and may be more in the future with max lot size = 1 and max simultanious open trades = 12.
If lot multiplier = 0.1 so I will have small drawdowen but ROI is 44% only ...
So, if lot multiplier = 0.3: in this case max floating drawdown was about 1,400 dollars. In this case initial deposit should be about 5,000. Profit: 6,677.
But as I said - I am having same error with everybody about this signal. And as I am not closing anything manually (I just attached RAS EA to the chart and forgot for the about 2 months - I posted my clone/buyer's performance here.
So,
1. Ask to instal the clone (automatic buyer) of any signal before subscribing. To compare the performance of the vendor and the performance of the clone/buyer.
2. I can do same analysis for any signal precented on this section. But please note: analysis without clone's performance is less valuable.
New Digital,
with regards the clone, I think the most obvious thing to be looking at is any times where the clone does not open or close a trade when the signal proir does. Obviously from a clone you can also see how much affect a different broker, spread and lag has on the pips gained lost, but the more serious thing to look for is actual errors in trade open and closures. For example look at this trade on the clone:
659424 98924436 B GBPUSD 0.50 2010-03-17 12:20:41
2010-03-17 14:32:21 1.536 1.5331 1.53146 -82 USD
-16 pips
This trade was closed @ 14.32 on the clone and 13.03 on the signal provider - it was this late closing that caused a loss of 16 pips on the clone compared to a gain of 11 pips by Globis.
I think these errors are the major concern - this actual error occurred for me to - my trade was closed @ 14.32 too and I know others were. It is these errors and the lack of knowing what causes them and how often they occur that make RAS at times unreliable - we can all cope with lag and monitor how this affects th results over aa sample of trades to get an average expectancy and work this into our expected return calculations but what we cant factor is random RAS problems in closing trades a significant time after Globis closes them. RAS website recorded the trade closing so I presume the trade closure was reported to RAS ok, so it is a problem with RAS commuinicating with buyers...as I said for this one trade I know multiple people where this trade wasc losed @ 14.32 so it is a universal problem not one persons connection.
If the moderators can explore why / how these random problems occur and how they can be solved then RAS would be so much more reliable. As I said lag can be accounted for by analysis, random RAS problems cannot.
Whenever I look at the log at these errors there is no error RAS hasn't even attempted to close the trade...these errors are frustrating and need to be sorted or if not explanations as to why they occur as otherwise people including myself do not have confidence in the RAS software.