Is the advisor suitable for real life? - page 39
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
What's the point in sorting it out? It is a waste of time. It is better not to mess with it (the algorithm) at all.
As someone who cares about forum activism, I strongly object to this formulation of the issue. Implementing your suggestion would halve the number of discussions :))
Tick modelling on MT5 (no more than 11 ticks per bar) is slightly different to MT4 (no more than 4). The overlap with Real is only in Open and Close for both. So the theories with ticks cannot be tested either here or there. And you can talk, discuss as much as you want, if only to increase the "number of discussions". :-))
What's the point in sorting it out? It is a waste of time. It is better not to mess with it (the algorithm) at all.
Then it's better not to contact with Forex. It is a bastard. And if you mess with it, you have no choice, you have to, there is no way back.
Tick modelling on MT5 (no more than 11 ticks per bar) is slightly different to MT4 (no more than 4). The overlap with Real is only in Orip and Close for both. ... :-))
Slava (expert in tester, pips and graals) once wrote, that Close is not a fact... :-)))
Oh yes, beautiful pictures from the tester are an essential part of a trader's life. Motivation for sleepless nights and flights of fancy).
That's why we need to study the algorithm to obtain an exact correspondence of the tester and the real results. Using the algorithm, you can calculate on what models the tester enters the market.
That's why we should study the algorithm, to achieve an exact correspondence between the tester and the real results. You can use the algorithm to calculate on which models the tester enters the market.
I agree, it is necessary to present the algorithm, but trying to describe it in all its subtleties is something I would have spared time on.
By the way, I assumed that the results of your Expert Advisor did not take into account the pseudo-tester realities on minutes. That is why the result is so beautiful. But it is deceptive, like a fleeting vision...
That's why we need to study the algorithm, in order to achieve the exact correspondence between the tester's results and the real one. You can use the algorithm to calculate on which models the tester enters the market.
I agree, it is necessary to present the algorithm, but trying to describe it in all its subtleties is something I would have spared time on.
By the way, I assumed that the results of your Expert Advisor did not take into account the pseudo-tester realities on minutes. That is why the result is so beautiful. But it is deceptive, like a fleeting vision...
In all intricacies and not necessarily. I have an approximate idea of what it is, as the system is simple.
He's trading on the plus side so far. There is still a deviation towards profit. The second version is already 60% in three days with a risk per trade of 4%.
In all intricacies and not necessarily. I have a rough idea of what this is about, as the system is simple.
He's trading on the upside so far. There is still a deviation towards profit. The second version is already 60% in three days.