Signal info changed! - page 2

To add comments, please log in or register
Sergey Golubev
Moderator
110865
Sergey Golubev  
drayzen:
The Provider posted this update yesterday.
So the new hosting would appear to be the cause, though I don't see how that could explain the account history changing so dramatically for only 2019 with no impact on 2018 results.
Possibly it is now a different account history somehow and MQL5 has cached the 2018 results..?
I think you need to contact both MQL5 Support and the Provider for explanation.
Please update here with responses you receive..

If it is related to the monthly growth (I am not sure ... but just in case) - 
read this thread for more explanation (general explanation) from admins:
Signals - Reliability

drayzen
523
drayzen  
Keith Watford:

 We are forum moderators, we are not associated with MQL5 in any way except to moderate the forum. We are not employed by MQL5.

I removed your offensive remark because that is what forum moderators do.

I believe that this topic is pointless because none of us have any idea what mechanisms MQL5 use to decide to modify growth rates.

The subject has been brought up so many times in multiple earlier topics and there is no answer forthcoming from MQL5.

This whole shambles since the service desk only accepts financial issues and directs people to the forum is totally ridiculous. We cannot answer the questions with any certainty.

Many people are obviously using this to promote their signals/products in the forum under the guise of complaining that their ridiculously high growth rate has been modified down.

If respect is so important here, then please advise your fellow moderator that I am awaiting an apology in this thread for the offensive reply I received.

What are MQL5 customers expected to think when they see a legitimate concern raised like this and it is summarily stripped of detail?
Surely it is obvious to all involved that the optics of this are very negative and if all relevant information is stripped from the discussion there can be only one conclusion drawn.
If the thread starter posts responses from Support and/or the Signal Provider as I suggested would those also be deleted?

I believe I understand the purpose of the guidelines for moderation, in order to prevent the forum being overrun with promotion of commercial items.
Are the Moderator's guidelines publicly viewable?
Though if there is no facility allowed to actually act in moderation instead of just deleting everything possible, this also leaves customers with serious doubts as to intent.
There is obviously a distinct difference between what was posted here, and this recently posted thread: https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/314106, which is obvious clickbait advertising for the thread starter's new Signal, as why would a Provider be asking that question..
The allowance to determine the difference between these two threads is the capacity for moderation, if that is not possible then moderation does not exist, only filtration. There is an important difference.
A disallowance to recognize that it is nonsensical for a Provider to commission a user to post information that shows their Signal now providing substantially worse performance than it did previously is not in the interest of customers of this website.

drayzen
523
drayzen  
Sergey Golubev:

If it is related to the monthly growth (I am not sure ... but just in case) - 
read this thread for more explanation (general explanation) from admins:
Signals - Reliability

Hi Sergey,
Thank you for that information, though the data in question is the historical monthly performance figures.
The thread starter has outlined that they are distinctly different as observed at two different times.

Sergey Golubev
Moderator
110865
Sergey Golubev  
drayzen:

Hi Sergey,
Thank you for that information, though the data in question is the historical monthly performance figures.
The thread starter has outlined that they are distinctly different as observed at two different times.

"historical monthly performance figures" = monthly growth?
if yes so this information (from the link I provided) may be related to it.
for example - 

Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies

Signals - Reliability

Sergey Golubev, 2018.12.07 15:57

I provided the information I found (information from the thread opened by MQ).
As to "profitable signals may become less reliable" ... There are some limitation concerning it - 

  • abnormal monthly growth (some people told about 50% in a month, some of them told about 80%; means: if the signal is making more than 50% in a month so the results/stats from this month will not be considered for this signal);
  • the signal will not be available for subscription if drawdown on open trades were more than 30%;
  • and some more ...

many information is not disclosed ... and we do not know exact numbers and so on.

The only problem is the following:
I do not think that 45.82% growth (for January) was "too much" ... we do not know the formula and the limit of it (the people say that if the monthly growth is 80% and above so this growth will be ignored incl historical figures) ...

I think - it is something with the broker (broker deleted some part of the history), or MQ recalculated the growth or changed the formula for the monthly growth calculation ...

-----------

OP (topic starter) may write to the service desk for clarification for example.

drayzen
523
drayzen  
Sergey Golubev:

OP (topic starter) may write to the service desk for clarification for example.

Yes, this is what I suggested to the OP earlier in the thread.
I suggested to contact both Support and Provider then post responses here.

ovidiubenone
379
ovidiubenone  

If you check the change is form jan'19 and since 2.2.2019 this account is 24/7 in mql servers. So is not a problem of HISTORY but BAD MATH in REAL TIME!

I got an answer form MQL but is so ... that I will not even mention it 

12
To add comments, please log in or register