I'll buy a councilor - page 9
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
That's right... If it were not for one BUT... Comrade says about a REAL multi (-timescale, -instrumental) GRAAL, which ONLY for real money can chop dough ... :-)
On the other hand, neither in the "Cool Peppers", nor in the "Peasants" - he was not seen ... :-) so... Nothing to talk about, it's called Lyricism... :-)
All "Tales from the Vienna Woods and the Secrets of the Court of Madrid! A mystery covered in darkness :-) in a dream... :-)
It seems to be about me...
You see, I'm not quite sure where else to get dough if not for real money. You can't make a lot of money selling bullshit. I am talking about a trading system, which is what it is, not just in name. The profit on the highest-yielding market must be incomparably greater than the profit from trading chinks on the clothing market. You can call such a system a grail if you like.
I originally had no desire to state something like that in this thread.
I just wanted to understand why people ask for a good Expert Advisor when they know that no one will sell it. Or don't they understand? Is it possible not to understand it? How many percent of the brain must stop working for this to be possible? How much time is needed to understand the simple fact that it is faster to write a necessary Expert Advisor yourself than to ask someone to buy it? Why engage in Forex trading with the certainty that only ridiculous earnings are possible? How can a trading system be based on the return of a part of spread?(what is it? some kind of fraud related to attracting new clients?) I don't get it yet...
I, for example, will never use a trading system if it
-Works only on certain instruments
I am not interested in systems on one symbol at the moment, so this requirement is satisfied automatically. But if I go back to a single instrument, I will of course consider this requirement.
Otherwise I would express it in this negative way: "the system does not allow for diversification across many instruments".
-operates only on certain timeframes
I would put it this way: "the range of profitable for the system TF is too narrow". If the system shows profitability on H1, H4, D1, why not put it on H4, thinking that it works in the centre of the robustness area?
-Only works in certain conditions (trend, flat, news...)
Let it work in any of these phases - but it does not open positions in the phases of the market in which it is losing. My current system just prefers to open at the news (even if they are not announced).
-only works on specific timeframes
Well, everything is clear here.
-has a ratio of profit/loss trades close to 1
-has a ratio of profit and loss per trade close to 1
If both conditions are simultaneous, then the system is not sugar. But if not - it is better to look additionally at the condition, which is not satisfied.
Let's say if the first condition is met, then the losing series are about as long as the profitable ones. Then the drawdowns can be very long. To avoid such sensitivity, the ratio of profit trade to loss trade must be considerably larger than 1. And vice versa: if the second condition is met, the first proportion should be much greater than 1.
You may combine these conditions in one negative: "system's profit factor is slightly higher than 1 on any significant amount of trades".
-requires the use of a tester to confirm its performance.
I almost never use the tester myself. I would add one more: "[requires the use of a tester/optimizer] to calculate some of its parameters (not determined by logical reasoning)".
I don't seem to have forgotten anything.
I would also add:
- the results of the system are highly dependent on the conditions in the DC.
It's simpler than that. We work on one instrument, no multicurrency. Diversification is not expected. Some instruments are rejected because the system simply does not work on them. Working conditions in the brokerage company play a determining role.
The main thing: it is intuitive to understand why a position is open and not so much why it was closed.
You have a Lada, you buy yourself a gelding, what do you do with the Lada?
Leave it to drive potatoes.
I propose the following technology for selling EAs.
1. The buyer transfers to the seller an amount equal to the value of the EA.
2. The seller puts this money on the PAMM account, and sets the advisor for trading.
3. if in agreed upon period of time EA increases the deposit on the agreed amount of money, then the seller transfers the EA to the buyer. Otherwise the seller returns the money to the buyer.
It is possible to have an arbitrator, which would guarantee the money back. That is, the amount to be refunded is given to the arbitrator by the seller at the time of the agreement.
We are not expecting a rollback. No refills. Real. For 5k. tried to sell specifically (two days. doubling with a hak). insurance against plum present. strategy mixed from several and personal experience:
When it's a dime a dozen.... There's only one thing left to do - chase... :-)
It's simpler than that. We work on one instrument, no multicurrency. Diversification is not expected. Some instruments are rejected because the system simply does not work on them. Working conditions in the brokerage company play a determining role.
The main thing: it is intuitive to understand why a position is open and not so much why it was closed.
Not a grail, then.