a trading strategy based on Elliott Wave Theory - page 114
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
No, Sergei, it's OK. You simply put a question which cannot be answered without knowing what meaning you give to what, without knowing the idea of the model.
And I gave for an example the idea of model and knowingly not corresponding to it variant of interpretation.
Yes, I understood my incorrectness in the question. It seems to me that the licence agreements introduced are preventing us from developing creatively.
PS: By the way, such an animated script I have made myself long ago. :о))).
I do not agree! It all depends on the correspondence of the working principles of the Expert Advisor to the test modes available in the tester. For the testing mode of an Expert Advisor I mentioned above which is run once at the arrival of a new M30 bar, the tester shows discrepancies with the practice of several pips when closing/opening an order when testing by the "Open prices" model on an M30 period (in practice the price jerks back and forth by 2-3 pips every few seconds). Of course, if you run the expert that makes calculations at every new tick to test on M30 "At opening prices", the results will be different and unbelievable, because the Expert Advisor's working logic does not coincide with the logic of testing in these conditions. By the way, it's written in the article on how to use the Strategy Tester ( "MQL4: Strategy Tester: Modelling Modes of Testing" ) like this
I think it would be more reasonable, for many reasons, to write EAs that the МТ4 tester allows to correctly assess than to invent a mini-tester by means of МQL4 or to have the developers asking "Why the tester results do not coincide with the EA's real-time results?
I agree with you though. If you use the tester competently, that's an honour and praise to you. Again, the MQ tester is a great thing. Without it, MT4 would look much more modest. You just have to know where to put it and where you can use it and where not. :-)
Well, dear solandr, you are lost here. You have to write experts to make money and not to make the tester feel good. Ah, dear fellow, do not put the cart before the horse!
Of course you should not harass the developers. All the more so with silly questions. But you should invent as much as you can and with gusto! Creativity, solandr, is a wonderful thing. There's no need to forbid it, not even to try, even if it's a "minitester". Only thanks to the work of Vladislav, and to a certain extent yours, are you now trading that Expert Advisor which has had 6 positive trades, and not the one that has been losing everything.
In principle, one does not contradict the other. Man is simply not always able to change the world around him, but to make the most of the opportunities available to him, it is quite realistic. The main thing is to understand in time - where the boundary lies between what can be changed and what cannot be changed.
Good luck with your creativity! Just at one time tried some people from outside to write something of their own, but so far no one recognized any particular success. You may ask MT4 developers about it. They have already participated in the discussion of this question many times.
Truly wise! I totally agree.
No one will say. For example, I use my tester, implemented as an animated script, and why should I talk about it and claim it's better - use mine. It "bypasses" some of the limitations of the built-in tester, which I have great respect for, but does not completely replace it at all. Still determines the need. (See point one. :o)))))
I have the impression that I have missed much. It is understandable, it is the second time I have logged in this month. But now I want to know how things went during this time. Maybe someone can shed some light on it?
It's elementary. Demo account at interbank is alive for 2 weeks, no matter what. Now a new account and just an experiment (those have already sunk :( ). I just didn't know about it. Before maximal risk was 40% (for real account even for maximal risks it's too much) from deposit, but with the new account I put 80% (what I do not recommend anyone - too big drawdown). Immediately I saw a sharp increase - a bit over 300% in one or two trades, but the drawdowns accordingly as well. I also had some issues with Interbank server and some info about all my accounts is gone. I don't restore the statement yet. I`m just looking at other accounts. My recommendations on real trading were as follows: the maximum risk should not be higher than 30% of the deposit. For now my trading robots with minimal risks (maximal drawdown for a trade is 2%, maximal drawdown for a day is no more than 5%, maximal drawdown of a deposit is no more than 30%) are near zero. Maximum drawdown was about 7%, the maximum amount of profit is about the same. Now the drawdown is around 2%.
Sincerely, Vladislav.
Good luck and good trends.
If you have a trade robot you will have to use some other forex brokerage firm which will help you in your search for profits. You may use these accounts to trade with minimum Sizes all the time. If you want to use an EA on this type of account we should use a lot more than we already have in the past. My Lites, on the real account the maximal risk was 40% and flexible lot count control. Thus the growth of deposit was maximal there until my Expert Advisor was added to their "black list" or whatever you want to call it :).
I think everyone will be very interested to see the results.
I think everyone will be very interested to see the results.
Here's more of a question for metaquotes - it seems the tester doesn't work with external dlls :(. Or maybe I just can not do it yet ?
Regards, Vladislav.
Good luck and good luck with the trends.
I finished drawing channels the other day and decided to see how it all looks on the picture. So I did. It looks nice. But there is one problem. Unlike various numerical indicators that do not change their values on completed bars, channels and other chart things may change their appearance on every new bar in the past. That's why, for example, the picture I've got reflects only a certain point in time, and not the most interesting one.
So I decided to make a cartoon of the story, in order to watch, as if in real time, how events were unfolding, how channels were being rearranged, at what moment the conditions for making a decision by an expert were formed, etc. After a short effort, this cartoon spins. The red vertical line on the chart marks the "current" moment in time. To the left of it, the channels are dynamically developing, and to the right, the "future" about which the program is not aware. It is instructive.
Why am I saying all this? I see that you are using a tester. It is certainly a great tool, thanks to MetaQuotes. But it has its own peculiarities. In particular, you cannot rely on its results. On the other hand, it's not difficult to create a script-tester, to implement all the indicators used as subroutines - functions or procedures, and take the Expert Advisor logic as the core part and use this script to work out the entry/exit conditions. You can even simulate the price behavior inside the current bar that will use the limited OHLC random generation of price sequences. I think such a script tester will create conditions very close to reality for an Expert Advisor. Accordingly, the test results will also be obtained.
And if we also combine these two things, we can visualize the work of the Expert Advisor on history. Sometimes it is much more useful to see how an Expert Advisor behaves in certain spots than to get a complete profit report along with a set of optimized parameters.
This all could make a useful and instructive article.
I offer this topic to you.
Been there...done that - "Open Project - tester-optimizer by ourselves".
I wanted to make a script-multiple (and can in principle), but at some point I realized that we can do with screenshots from the tester (watching a slideshow of tens of thousands of them is tiresome after all).
Didn't quite get it. It seems like if you do with screenshots from the tester, then you have to watch a slideshow of tens of thousands. And if I just change parameters of graphic objects in the script every time I re-calculate it, then I will get a cartoon. At least that's how it works for me.
I could not really watch enough of the big stories. But firstly, you can always increase speed by decreasing parameter in Sleep. Second, you must review places where the Expert Advisor behaves ineffectively.
I have read that thread, that is why I addressed you with this suggestion. The tester-indicator, in my opinion, is less convenient. The script has more possibilities for process control. In any case the base is always a loop on all history bars.
Never mind, let's move on.