Discussion of article "Automatic Selection of Promising Signals"
It turns out that a custom GUI is offered, but not the selection criteria.
The developers have long been asked to give access to the Signal trading history through Signal-functions. The terminal itself has such access when it displays the history in the form of objects on charts. But MQL does not have it.
It is almost impossible to write something sensible without it. Only GUI, which is what the article shows.
It turns out that a custom GUI is offered, but not the selection criteria.
The developers have long been asked to give access to the Signal trading history through Signal-functions. The terminal itself has such access when it displays the history in the form of objects on charts. But MQL does not have it.
It is almost impossible to write something sensible without it. Only GUI, which is what the article shows.
...
It is almost impossible to write anything useful without it. Only GUI, which is what the article shows.
You can't quantitatively evaluate something that is characterised mostly by qualitative evaluation.
Signal service does not give any qualitative evaluation to any signal.
Also, all evaluation techniques do not use a single qualitative evaluation in their evaluations.
As an example, let's take the Pareto method -- if 80% of a signal's viability is influenced only by qualitative parameters -- then how can you compare two signals using only quantitative evaluations that can only evaluate 20% of the signal's viability.
You cannot quantitatively evaluate something that is characterised predominantly by qualitative evaluation.
Please disclose the term in question. Regarding TC poker, based on history they are well calculated.
Please explain this term.
As an example, if there was a qualitative assessment of a signal, then the notorious TOP-1 signal with the trading style of "over-sitting" would never be in the TOP and it doesn't matter what its lifetime, drawdown or growth is. The same applies to signals with martin-strategy and ilan-strategy.
That is, one qualitative assessment can nullify dozens of other excellent quantitative assessments.
That is, one qualitative assessment can negate dozens of other wonderful quantitative assessments.
Yes, without history, it's a dead end.
Yes, without history, it's a dead end.
Quantitative assessments can be fundamentally harmful and even misleading to subscribers.
Take the "number of subscribers" estimate -- it plays an important role in signal evaluation.
But that estimate bears more of a "crowd effect" stamp -- i.e., it's a subjective estimate.
And the evaluation of the TOP should be devoid of subjective evaluations.
Qualitative assessments are extremely difficult to derive.
As an example of the importance of qualitative assessment: three wolves and a flock of sheep -- who is the biggest?
For a long time I have been watching the products and promotion of products of a certain Mechanic.
His products are in the TOP, super-popular. For each product Mechanic demonstrates a signal on a real account.
BUT.
All his products are exclusively Ilan-Martin trading. Most of his signals live no more than 10 weeks.
It is clear that by quantitative parameters -- his products are the top ones -- there is excitement and this excitement is supported by the MK-Market-system itself (site chronicle, TOP, banner adverts in the second line on every page of the site).
But if to make a qualitative assessment -- its products should be far at the end of the TOP.
Recently in the signals of MK introduced the indicator "reliability" -- this indicator is again based solely on quantitative indicators -- that's why there are complaints about its adequacy and objectivity on the forum.
For a long time I have been watching the products and promotion of products of a certain Mechanic.
His products are in the TOP, super-popular. For each product Mechanic demonstrates a signal on a real account.
BUT.
All his products are exclusively Ilan-Martin trading. Most of his signals live no more than 10 weeks.
It is clear that by quantitative parameters -- his products are the top ones -- there is excitement and this excitement is supported by the MK-Market-system itself (site chronicle, TOP, banner adverts in the second line on every page of the site).
But if to make a qualitative assessment -- its products should be far at the end of the TOP.
Recently in the signals of MK introduced the indicator "reliability" -- this indicator is again based solely on quantitative indicators -- that's why there are complaints about its adequacy and objectivity on the forum.
He always has a new product and immediately free... it's okay, but the most important thing is why I, for example, also download a free product 1000 times, but write 1-2 reviews, and he has 20-30 at once, that's the question. Then the product becomes paid, but the rating is already there and attracts more and more users
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
New article Automatic Selection of Promising Signals has been published:
The article is devoted to the analysis of trading signals for the MetaTrader 5 platform, which enable the automated execution of trading operations on subscribers' accounts. Also, in this article we consider the development of tools, which help search for potentially promising trading signals straight from the terminal.
We will visually divide the above rating system into three categories (fig. 2).
Fig 2. Categories of the grading scale for the rating of trading signals
Author: Alexander Fedosov