The miracles continue! - page 4
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
Tried to optimise on demo account 4 digits tested on five digits real account
the discrepancy is insignificant... may try another EA to check ...
Angela,try this EA also
I'll echo the previous comrades' views.
1. Strategies with bar opening control work stably in the tester, unlike tick strategies. The developers have repeatedly warned about the undesirability of tick strategies due to their increased sensitivity to historical data.
2. A sophisticated Expert Advisor of an average author can show a swine flu growth chart instead of the balance.
3. With the process you have described, taking into account that ticks are generated by the tester from minute data, the slightest difference in the history can lead to a snowball effect. A slight change in the minute history leads to significant changes in the tick stream, and the specific methods of processing and filtering sensitively catch those differences and produce inconsistent data for the logic unit. Roughly speaking, the Expert Advisor works on noise.
4. I do not want to offend you, but when fighting with the terminal I always had to admit my own inadequacy in the first place. :))
I am not trying to find an extremist, I just want to understand the problem and as far as possible to secure myself for the future when working in the real world. I don't know what to do about it but the information is so inadequate in Alpari terminals that I have a suspicion they may have modified the terminals I have downloaded from their site.
>>Why is the terminal with MQ showing the same results, while the one with Alpari is different not only with MQ, but with their own previous test one hour ago?
Tried to optimise on demo account 4 digits tested on five digits real account
the discrepancy is insignificant... may try another EA to check ...
Angela,try this EA in the same way
I will try it and tomorrow I will post the result.
Oops... Tics ?)
Hopefully at least a TF of 1 min? It's simple, post screenshots of visual tests of 2 of these passes, where there are discrepancies in trades...
Screenshot from Alpari terminal:
Screenshot from MQ terminal:
I see different quotes. Please increase the area from 00:00 03.09.09. or the area from 12:30 04.09.09.
It would also be optimal to find out how sensitive the rules are.
I was debugging the TS on the terminal downloaded from the MQ server, decided to do a parallel test on another part of the history, and put the TS on another terminal downloaded from the Alpari server. The TS started to work differently. For the sake of purity of the experiment I took the same interval of history, from September 1 to 25, the data was downloaded from the same Alpari server, the same TS and the same test results:
terminal downloaded from Alpari
terminal downloaded from MQ
As you can see nothing in common, even trades were opened in different places most of the time.
I am confused! What is going on? Do trading centers give us terminals from their sites already "tweaked" in accordance with their interests and we use our TS tried and tested on another terminal and begin to use them for the good of the brokerage company?
Has anyone else faced this problem?
And one more detail from my observations. As you can see on the terminal with MQ the quality of simulation n/a, I periodically have to reload the quotes history on this terminal and recalculate it on all timeframes based on M1, after that the quality of simulation becomes 90% but as soon as I go offline and connect to the Alpari server the missing history is downloaded and I usually connect once a day and as a result once I connect to the server and download a small piece of history, the simulation quality remains constant So somehow connecting to the server a terminal downloaded not from Alpari's website corrupts the quotes history, i.e. there is some connection of another terminal with their server?
First time we got to know.
You can only check the system in real time and nowhere else.
After a while, the system will be at a loss.
We'll have to make another one.
And so on in a circle until you get bored.
Tried to optimise on demo account 4 digits tested on five digits real account
the discrepancy is insignificant... may try another EA to check ...
Angela,try this EA also
I ran your EA on both terminals from May 18 to September 25 on EURUSD M15, the terminals showed complete unanimity, insignificant discrepancies in pips, unfortunately the test did not reach September. MC came at the same time in the same place, although there is a discrepancy of 1 minute:
on the Alpari terminal
on the MQ terminal
I see different quotes. Please increase the area from 00:00 03.09.09. or the area from 12:30 04.09.09.
It would also be optimal to know how sensitive the rules are.
on Alpari terminal
on MQ terminal
The rules are generated by the results of a certain combination of flags set when the appropriate filter group is triggered. The system is sensitive, but the question is why on the MQ terminal where the TS was debugged, the test results are repeatable, while on the Alpari terminal there is not even repeatability on the same data?
For the first time you have learned
The system can only be tested in real life and nowhere else
After a while, the system will be at a loss.
We'll have to build another one.
And so on in a circle until you get bored.
With this all is clear and it is not news, the question is in the difference of terminals work.
I ran your Expert Advisor on both terminals from 18 May till 25 September on EURUSD M15, the terminals showed complete agreement, insignificant discrepancies in pips, unfortunately the test did not reach September.
:)
Full unanimity - that is without minor discrepancies.
You are using different quotes.