Who wants a strategy? Lots and for free) - page 18
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
The rar weighs 13mb, I don't know if I can upload such a big file here.
This is an official forum of a software company, I don't think you should upload someone else's commercial software with crack codes here) And Terranin won't be happy...
***************************
To follow up the previous post, a script for preparing quotes (I think I've made some changes to it lately)
What do you say to that? "May the profits be with you!!!"
What do you say to that? "May the profits be with you!!!"
<indicatorName>Fibonacci</indicatorName>
<listParam paramNumber="0">
<caption>Logic</caption>.
<index>0</index>
<value>Enter the market at a Fibonacci level - For demo only!!!</value> <---------------
</listParam>
The Fibonacci indicator is for DEMO. It is written. Fibonacci repaints past signals and that shows better results.
---
I've red somewhere in the forum that the interpolation methods show different results depending on the strategy. They probably work well. For the Pivot Points mentioned above - the Nearest method has been used. It always executes the nearest order first. So what is shown on the screenshot is correct.
Also I think there is a case where the Pessimistic method does not do the worst scenario. For that the Comparator is provided.
I've used FxSB for one year and I think it's reliable enough.
When there are two orders in one bar FSB counts this bar as ambiguous and marks it clearly. (It depends on the method has been used.)
The key point is to adjust the indicators. I've compaired most of them to the MT's indicators. I haven't seen any difference until now. Even there are many private cases which FxSB calculates better.
Well, put the Shortest, Pessimistic model, regardless of the end result in your particular case, these are the models that avoid unnecessary wackiness inside the bar. The Nearest model is just a weird one, I think the generator may be adjusting the strategy to its specifics. You can read about the models here.
Well, that's why I say that Nearest, Random and Optimistic models are practically useless! And people need to know about it! :)))
And the weirdness inside the bars in these models is almost the same. I took Nearest as the more "correct" of the three.
I promised proof, but I don't even know what to prove yet) Here's the strategy and its implementation in MQL. I have it on the same data, there is virtually no difference. And what there is (a few pips/bucks) causes some questions both for FSB (more likely just different values of indicator calculations in FSB and MT4 (swap calculation, somehow it is not clear for me in some cases). Otherwise the results are almost identical.
I think you remember that I have Alpari quotes uploaded to FxSB.
So your strategy in mods Nearest, Random, Optimistic still gives some (not serious) profit...
Well, on Shortest and Pessimistic the drain is steep and unambiguous.
I also ran your strategy in MT4.
The period from 2007.12.15 to 2009.02.24, initial deposit $100000.
In the "Checkpoints" mod (I am not advised to pay attention to the result): +9650.
In "All ticks": -34820. In other words - a huge drain!
I looked at the results and on the chart - the profits are small, the losses are huge.
In reality, no one would use this strategy.
What quotes are you using?
And what are your results in FxSB and MT4?
What do you say to that? "May the profits be with you!!!"
This one looks more or less working.
Tried it on different currencies, different timeframes, always
with Pessimistic: there's always a profit! But not a big one.
Which quotes do you use?
And what are your results in FxSB and MT4?
XC quotations, both there, data for current February, EURUSD 1H, in MT model all ticks, in FSB any, in both cases minimum lot, with the same starting depo 1000, with the same number of trades, for February doubling happens with a difference of 10-20 quid. The trades coincide, except for one, slightly shifted opening (just seems to be due to the different digit capacity of used indicator values). To me this is definite proof of the sanity of the FSB tester.
______________________________________________________________________________
If anybody has any doubts you can check the validity of my words, you have the possibility to do it yourself. The program is simple, but it requires certain skills in use. As for the complex ones, you need to be an expert here, and know the features of both programs. But considering its free of charge and license as is, it has the right to live).
Who can tell me what these codes are? They can't be used in MT4, can they? Or am I wrong?
I cannot use them, how can they be converted for MT4?
I have an EOM for MT4, but for some reason it does not work can someone figure it out?
/+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//| Ease of Movement.mq4 |
//| Copyright © 2007, MetaQuotes Software Corp.
//| Forex Trading Software: Forex Trading Platform MetaTrader 4 |
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
#property copyright "Copyright © 2007, MetaQuotes Software Corp.
#property link "http://www.metaquotes.net"
#property indicator_separate_window
#property indicator_minimum -50
#property indicator_maximum 50
#property indicator_buffers 1
#property indicator_color1 Yellow
//---- buffers
double ExtMapBuffer1[];
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//| Custom indicator initialisation function |
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
int init()
{
//---- indicators
SetIndexStyle(0,DRAW_LINE);
SetIndexBuffer(0,ExtMapBuffer1);
string short_name = "Ease of Movement";
IndicatorShortName(short_name);
//----
return(0);
}
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//| Custom indicator deinitialization function |
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
int deinit()
{
//----
//----
return(0);
}
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//| Custom indicator iteration function |
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
int start()
{
int counted_bars=IndicatorCounted();
//----check for errors
if (counted_bars<0) return(-1);
//----last counted bar will be recounted
if (counted_bars>0) counted_bars--;
int k = Bars - counted_bars;
double midptT, midptY, boxR, midptM, EMV;
while (k>0)
{
midptT = (High[k] + Low[k])/2;
midptY = (High[k-1] + Low[k-1])/2;
midptM = midptT - midptY;
boxR = Volume[k]/(High[k] - Low[k]);
EMV = midptM / boxR;
ExtMapBuffer1[k] = EMV;
k--;
}
return(0);
}
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
For starters, maybe that's the point:
IndicatorCounted() returns the actual number of bars counted minus one
и
For starters, maybe that's the point:
IndicatorCounted() returns the actual number of bars counted minus one
и
I rewrote it to my taste and colour; it seems to be something like Eom, but some peaks are unclear.
#property indicator_separate_window
//#property indicator_minimum 50
//#property indicator_maximum 50
#property indicator_buffers 1
double ExtMapBuffer1[];
//--------------------------------------------------------------------
int init()
{
SetIndexStyle(0,DRAW_LINE);
SetIndexBuffer(0,ExtMapBuffer1);
return(0);
}
//--------------------------------------------------------------------
int start()
{
int counted_bars=IndicatorCounted(),
limit;
if(counted_bars>0)
counted_bars--;
limit=Bars-counted_bars;
for(int i=0;i<limit;i++)
{
ExtMapBuffer1[i]=(((((High[i] + Low[i])/2)-((High[i-1] + Low[i-1])/2))*(High[i] + Low[i]))/Volume[i])*1000000;
}
return(0);
}
//--------------------------------------------------------------------