The MT4 signal rankings are a complete joke. Currently the #1 signal "Small to Big Money" has lost 45% this month. LOL
You guys seriously need to re-evaluate your ranking criteria.
I am making 3 suggestions to MQL5 officials, in order to make the signals system more transparent:
1. Not to allow signals that haven't been connected to MQL5 database from the very beginning. That way we won't have signals with nice long history and "fake" drawdown because they've just been connected to MQL5 system.
2. To reject/stop signals that they make deposits when they are in a difficult position (high drawdown) in order to save their account, something that is against their subscribers, since it forces them to close or reduce their open copied positions.
3. To disqualify temporarily from the ranking system signals with a loss greater than 30% in the last month. The same rule applies now for signals with floating drawdown higher than 30%.
Any other suggestions are welcomed.
I'll bet that balance growth has a heavy weight in their ranking formula. This number is completely misleading because the signal providers can hold their floating losses indefinitely until margin call. The only purpose of this statistic is to attract newbies to subscribe to the signal.
Here are my suggestions to improve the system:
1. Minimum initial deposit should be at least usd1000.
2. Growth should be marked to market. Use equity growth instead of balance growth.
3. Martingale/Grids should be prohibited.
I have the following remarks on your suggestions:
1. I don't think that the $1000 threashold makes a signal good or bad, I have seen good and profitable signals with less than $1000 starting balance or even using a cent account and on the other hand I've seen scams with $10.000 or more. A good and profitable strategy should work whetever the balance.
2. That's a nice suggestion, since signals with high long-lasting drawdowns do not record those in the equity graph, only on the balance graph.
3. The system that someone uses in order to make profits, shouldn't be a reason for prohibition, I don't like or use these systems either, but I have seen them used with proper money management quite successful (very rarely though). I wouldn't be so dogmatic about them, I think its the subscriber's decision to choose them or not.
I think there should be an utility to allow users to export all the signals so that users can do sorting on their own with each criteria.
As for prohibition of signals, I think everyone has a reason why they will trade a particular way when they have reached a drawdown.
No one will know they will turn martingale or grid until a drawdown happens. I know some use zone recovery ea.
It is like knowing a boyfriend or girlfriend who turns out to be a love scammer. You will not know until you have been on a relationship with the person.
That is probably why there is a review column.
Possibly add good review count, and bad review count into the ranking criteria.
It should be up to users to reject signals on their own after they rank the signals.