Improvements in Quality Assurance of EA Devs and Support

monacofranze  

Dear Community, dear ladies and gentlemen from MQL5,

I'm here since a few months an want to share my findings about this platform so far.


Improvements in Quality Assurance of EA Devs

After a lot of research, reading and testing of the provided EAs here via MQL5 I come to the conclusion, there's a lot of improvement from MQL5 perspective, to protect the users from EAs which are Scam. And no question, there are many of them.

I want to discuss open minded my ideas for improvement:

  • Developer should provide a live signal of his product and used settings/currencies etc. before he's able to sell his product.
  • If EA is for free, no live signal should be provided.
  • A lot of the EAs do have hardcoded backtests. Backshifted backtests show in many cases completely different results. I see MQL5 as having to carry out spot checks here.
  • Devs of EAs do mainly give potential buyers the ability to test the EA as Demo for Backtesting. Like I pointed out before, this means nothing, if there's no live signal or if there are hardcoded backtests.
  • A detailed changelog is required. A few Devs deploy new Versions mainly to backoptimize the results.
  • Via Policy it shouldn't be allowed to offer a another free EA after user bought an EA from Dev. This is quite nice, but leads to weird Reviews where people mostly give good Reviews to get the EA for free. This is mainly a community problem which leads to problems.
  • Why not providing the ability, to test an EA on a live account for 14 days. If it's working, payment is done. If it's Scam, money back guarantee. From licensing perspective this should work out.
  • Description of each EA should fullfill reqirements like detail level or direct links to live signal etc. So each user knows exactly, what's going on for each EA. Each description should ideally look the same.

I know that MQL5 is getting commission for each sell. But MQL5 should find a balance between economy (money whise) and protection of the users.


Improvements in Support

2 weeks ago I tried to buy an EA. However I got an error in payment. The payment was done to MQL5 account, but I wasn't able to use the balance for the EA buying approach. After consulting the support, asking to withdrawal the money back to my Credit Card to pay again, the solution of the support was, that by policy this is not allowed. They could make an excuse but then they have to delete my account. Really?


Let's get some Feedback and further ideas here.

Testing trading strategies on real ticks
Testing trading strategies on real ticks
  • www.mql5.com
The article provides the results of testing a simple trading strategy in three modes: "1 minute OHLC", "Every tick" and "Every tick based on real ticks" using actual historical data.
Alain Verleyen  
I do agree with most of your points. But believe me, don't waste your time and energy on this. Metaquotes is adept of the "jungle" market (as most participants in this business), and they will do nothing to avoid scamming. They live from it, it's Forex business model. Most people stays some months, invest some money and lost it, the only remaining question is who will get that money.
Lorentzos Roussos  

Good ideas , allow me to provide some counter arguments in the interest of discussion.

  • Devs of EAs do mainly give potential buyers the ability to test the EA as Demo for Backtesting. Like I pointed out before, this means nothing, if there's no live signal or if there are hardcoded backtests.

The market system is built in a way that demo means strategy tester use only.Many devs build their own independent demos and distribute them.

  • Via Policy it shouldn't be allowed to offer a another free EA after user bought an EA from Dev. This is quite nice, but leads to weird Reviews where people mostly give good Reviews to get the EA for free. This is mainly a community problem which leads to problems.

This is actually very difficult to enforce or even detect algorithmically . Recently changes were introduced toward improvement by punishing those who turn free reviewed products to paid ones.
It would be more constructive if the reviews were accompanied with usage data , account usage , time from purchase .So you could see that Lorentzo (for example) reviewed a product with 5 stars 2 minutes after purchase with having used it 40 seconds.(and filter them as well).

  • Why not providing the ability, to test an EA on a live account for 14 days. If it's working, payment is done. If it's Scam, money back guarantee. From licensing perspective this should work out.

Agree on those , more control and flexibility (and even money back guarantee options should be available to sellers ,even the option for future discounts ,or even purchase bundles)

Furthermore : 

  • No minimum price
  • Affiliate Program
  • Profit Sharing Among Sellers
  • Profit Sharing for Signals (Provider agrees upon a % with the signal user ,no subscription)

  • Description of each EA should fullfill reqirements like detail level or direct links to live signal etc. So each user knows exactly, what's going on for each EA. Each description should ideally look the same.

Believe it or not it used to be very difficult to get a product published in the past 

Vaioo  

Hello Buedimuc,

thank you for your Comment.

@ MetaQuotes Ltd I can understand that your platform and the Meta Trader are offered for free. Of course, Meta Quotes has to earn money and can do this through the commissions of the programs sold, which are offered here. Like buedimuc, I bought an Exert Advisor. I trusted the DEV's backtest and also carried out quite a few backtest myself. Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent that the software in the live account did not work so perfectly and I lost money as a result. It is irresponsible that Meta Quotes does not check these programs and thus accepts that people lose their hard-earned money to such scam software. In addition, these programs cost a lot of money. Some aren't even worth $ 1.

I would also like that customers have the opportunity to try out such EA's in the live account. Or that the developers are forced to provide a live signal. Without this it should be forbidden to sell the software.

Timothy Joseph Derkitt  
Vaioo:

Hello Buedimuc,

thank you for your Comment.

@ MetaQuotes Ltd I can understand that your platform and the Meta Trader are offered for free. Of course, Meta Quotes has to earn money and can do this through the commissions of the programs sold, which are offered here. Like buedimuc, I bought an Exert Advisor. I trusted the DEV's backtest and also carried out quite a few backtest myself. Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent that the software in the live account did not work so perfectly and I lost money as a result. It is irresponsible that Meta Quotes does not check these programs and thus accepts that people lose their hard-earned money to such scam software. In addition, these programs cost a lot of money. Some aren't even worth $ 1.

I would also like that customers have the opportunity to try out such EA's in the live account. Or that the developers are forced to provide a live signal. Without this it should be forbidden to sell the software.

Thank you Valoo, I agree 100%. What can be done to formally complain?  Who at MetaQuotes montiors this type of thread?

monacofranze  

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. However, no feedback from any MQL-moderator so far. This shows clearly, that there's no real interest. If am I wrong, show it!

@mql-site How about some feedback regarding our points, suggestions and potential points to your business model?


@Lorentzos Roussos Thanks. Your ideas regarding the offering are good. Yes, hard to believe that it was hard to offer here something. Anyways, there should be a continous quality checking from MQL-site. They do know that people to sell a lot of SCAM here. Actually this is criminal even they do say, that they are just offering the platform...


Me and some users from community found out, that there are two devs obviously acting as "one company" and selling their products together. 

<Deleted>

@mql-site How is that even possible, during a know-your-Customer process? Did you guys failed to discern the identity of the authors?


And yes, the longer you look at the products (EAs) which are getting sold here, the more often you can see that there is a lot of lies and deceit. Faked and overoptimized backtests. If you shift them, results are completely different. No live signals, weird pricing models etc.

Grzegorz Pawlak  
If users weren't looking for "magic robots" that would make them millionaires starting at $100, there would be no problem, but we all know how it is.
monacofranze  
Grzegorz Pawlak:
If users weren't looking for "magic robots" that would make them millionaires starting at $100, there would be no problem, but we all know how it is.

There are different perspectives.

1. The users with their crappy Reviews just based on Backtests to get an EA for free or whatever

2. The Devs

3. The platform


So it's way to easy just to point out the users...

monacofranze  
buedimuc:

Dear Community, dear ladies and gentlemen from MQL5,

I'm here since a few months an want to share my findings about this platform so far.


Improvements in Quality Assurance of EA Devs

After a lot of research, reading and testing of the provided EAs here via MQL5 I come to the conclusion, there's a lot of improvement from MQL5 perspective, to protect the users from EAs which are Scam. And no question, there are many of them.

I want to discuss open minded my ideas for improvement:

  • Developer should provide a live signal of his product and used settings/currencies etc. before he's able to sell his product.
  • If EA is for free, no live signal should be provided.
  • A lot of the EAs do have hardcoded backtests. Backshifted backtests show in many cases completely different results. I see MQL5 as having to carry out spot checks here.
  • Devs of EAs do mainly give potential buyers the ability to test the EA as Demo for Backtesting. Like I pointed out before, this means nothing, if there's no live signal or if there are hardcoded backtests.
  • A detailed changelog is required. A few Devs deploy new Versions mainly to backoptimize the results.
  • Via Policy it shouldn't be allowed to offer a another free EA after user bought an EA from Dev. This is quite nice, but leads to weird Reviews where people mostly give good Reviews to get the EA for free. This is mainly a community problem which leads to problems.
  • Why not providing the ability, to test an EA on a live account for 14 days. If it's working, payment is done. If it's Scam, money back guarantee. From licensing perspective this should work out.
  • Description of each EA should fullfill reqirements like detail level or direct links to live signal etc. So each user knows exactly, what's going on for each EA. Each description should ideally look the same.

I know that MQL5 is getting commission for each sell. But MQL5 should find a balance between economy (money whise) and protection of the users.


Improvements in Support

2 weeks ago I tried to buy an EA. However I got an error in payment. The payment was done to MQL5 account, but I wasn't able to use the balance for the EA buying approach. After consulting the support, asking to withdrawal the money back to my Credit Card to pay again, the solution of the support was, that by policy this is not allowed. They could make an excuse but then they have to delete my account. Really?


Let's get some Feedback and further ideas here.

I also want to add one more point:

  • Implementing a version history of an EA to test older versions or to download them.
    Why? A lot of Devs do update very frequently in a 2 or 4 weeks rhythm their EAs. I allways save the older version manually and compare. And see, a lot of them backoptimized the history again, which is SCAM, no question.


@Mql_ea Mt4 Mt5@mql-site What do we have to do as users to get the feeling someone cares about this situation. No question, no one does on your site. Where's the moderator?

mql-site
mql-site
  • 2020.10.09
  • www.mql5.com
Trader's profile
monacofranze  

Some example regarding faked Backtests for Blueshift, Redshift and Reindeer Scalper Pro. Found out with TDS and some currency switching: https://www.mql5.com/en/market/product/60825#!tab=comments&page=2&comment=20971411


Before, some users and me found out that Marco the Dev of Blueshift and Redshift and Michela, the Dev of Reindeer Scalper Pro do have some connections, since Marco wrote the user manual for Reindeer. Mr. Alan Forex posted afterwards this interesting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9INlk6oVt34&feature=emb_logo


Using Complain-Button or whatever doesn't led so far to any connection. In my oppinion, this is exactly something, which I meant.

Reason: