Standard misconceptions in trying to trade in the noise (there was a "Nightmare on MT4 Street") - page 2

 

I downloaded my MT from Alpari. Here are their quotes for comparison. Notice the 1 hour time shift between the Alpari quotes and the quotes provided by S4kam. The candlesticks themselves are also different. Conclusion: different brokers, different time zones, different data sources and therefore different quotes. Now imagine that someone is trying to compile quotes from different dealers in different time zones: one dealer is in Moscow, another one is in Switzerland and the third one is in America. It's like a garbage game. My advice: download quotes from the dealer you are trading with.


 
Dear developers and their opponents. It seems to me that in order for the discussion to become at least a semblance of constructiveness, the latter should tone down their tone and arrogance a bit.

My opinion is as follows:

1) Developers need to thank them for History Center. Those who argue with them, apparently, don't know what it means when the product is supplied "As is". If you don't want it, don't use it. So you, dear opponents, have no right to blame the developers.

2) And now for the most constructive question. How realistic is it to use quotes from HC? Here my opinion is that their usefulness is at most 30% of what was possible. Since they do make testing inadequate - the volatility on them is HUGE than in quotes from brokers. The proof has already been there. 10 pips difference has also just been said, and with proof too.

The main questions to the developers (not a complaint!) - how do THEY advise to use the tool? They have already admitted that what is given in HC is an average indicator from various banks. That's all. From which banks, how it was averaged - they refused to answer these questions. When asked what EA may be considered "rough" and how it can be tested for "roughness", they didn't answer either. The answer was something along the lines of "if it behaves the same on different stories, then it is a rough Expert Advisor". And this is where the most interesting question comes in. We don't have MULTIPLE stories over 10 years. We only have HC. And how to assess the robustness of an EA?

To the developers: already tell everyone WHERE the quotes come from and HOW they were averaged. And you will stop being harassed. In fact, it is VERY strange that you are hiding it. It begs a certain group of questions. If only you were selling HC - no, it's free. So why not open all the cards?

I don't use HC. It is inadequate for me - I am not satisfied with indicator, I want to have a history of quotes, which WHERE and WHERE have deals been done. Maybe something along the lines of "best price on SPOTs" from some group of big banks. Since you only give an indicator which obviously correlates with quotes at which you can really click and buy, but as has been proven before me, BADly correlates.
 

Regarding the quote archive, the question has been haunting me for a long time - why doesn't the broker show real minute history?
And even more so, the price history?
Why do they make it a secret? But they do!

They show one product (on the demo), ask to send money (real money ;)), and then they give you another product (on the real account), and as a result you turn out to be a fool :).
Maybe someone can enlighten you?

 
>> And even more so, a poetic story?

>> Complicated. Technically. I don't understand why, but the fact that it's somehow not very easy (or not yet implemented) is a fact. Information from a conversation with the technical director of a similar company (though not a FOREX-broker).
 
> Difficult. Technically

Why?
Let them post it in their convenient open format - if that's what you need, write your own parser and convert it to your own convenient format.
Minutes are laid out (on demo), and how are ticks different?
Or the hell with these ticks.
But where are the real minutes?
My only logical explanation is that the real trade results in a unique quote stream for every trader.
So what is the secret?
 
kniff:
2) Now for the most constructive question. How realistic is it to use quotes from HC? My opinion here is that their usefulness is a maximum of 30% of what was possible. Since they do make testing inadequate - the volatility on them is HUGE than on quotes from brokers. The proof has already been there. The 10 pips difference has also just been said, and with proof too.
Please indicate in which period of time the "volatility is many times higher"? Probably in 1999-2003? So there has never been anyexecution, but only and exclusively informational quotes. That is, you cannot compare quotes from 2005-2006 and earlier ones from 2000.

Always use thick-skinned strategies and consider that trying to do analysis on anything below NN minutes is (to put it mildly) pure self-deception. So one gets into the noise, doesn't want to accept and admit it, gets into trouble on slightly different quotes and is just still learning. You will have to study for a long time, because you are too lazy to use the search :)

This is just one of the stages of learning. And it has been written about many times in great detail.
 
kniff:
>> And even more so, a poetic story?

>> Complicated. Technically. I don't understand why, but the fact that it's somehow not very easy (or not yet implemented) is a fact. Information from a conversation with the technical director of a similar company (though not a FOREX-broker).
Just another person wants to work within the noise, that's why he demands ticks, thinking that "that's what the real prices are". This is a standard beginner's delusion, which has been repeatedly written about in this forum with details.
 
Renat писал (а):
Just another person wants to work within the noise, so he demands ticks, thinking that "these are the real prices". These are standard beginner's fallacies, as has been written about in this forum many times and in great detail.
Renat, personally I am interested in ticks for two reasons:
1. To look at how hairpins look like on the real - is it a pass-through of a quote only for one tick or not, how quickly the price recovers?
2. Sometimes it is 50-100 points per minute and then it is unclear, if it is a stable fall or a micro-trend. If you look at the data, you understand, you cannot understand anything.

The interest, I emphasize, is purely sporting :).
But let's not bring up an old theme - about ticks and thinness of Expert Advisors, I've already said - to hell with these ticks.

Why don't you explain another thing - why doesn't the brokerage company post real minutes?
 
>> Always use thick-skinned strategies and consider that trying to do analysis on anything below NN minutes is (to put it mildly) pure self-deception. So the >>person gets into the noise, doesn't want to accept and acknowledge it, gets in trouble on slightly different quotes and is just still learning. It'll take a long time to learn, because I'm too lazy to >>use search :)

1) Explain to me, please, what is a "thick-skinned" strategy? You use the term, appealing to our internal understanding of the term, which is different for everyone.

2) Look at the above charts at the beginning of the thread. We are talking about a comparison of at least the same quotes from Alpari and HC. The difference can be 10 pips - there is an opinion that this is a bit much.
 
kniff писал (а):
.....

2) Look at the above charts at the beginning of the thread. We are talking about comparing at least the same quotes from Alpari and HC. There is sometimes a difference of 10 pips - there is an opinion that this is a bit much.
A bit much relative to what? Is it a lot relative to a monthly or weekly timeframe? And will we use such a notion as system (quotes) memory relative to a timeframe?
Reason: