For those who are convinced that all EAs with a martin are losing out. - page 49

New comment
 
yosuf:
Martin is too obvious a TC, it's silly to assume that no anti-martin has been invented!

What do you mean by anti-martin - a remedy against martins?
 
khorosh:
What do you mean by antimartin - a remedy against martins?

Yes. You need to hide the presence of a martin in the TS algorithm, as I have done. Martin is not applied and implied from the start of the trade, but at the right moment when all other means have been exhausted. I think you got it. If not, see my account monitoring.
 
yosuf:
Yes. You need to hide the presence of a martin in the TS algorithm, as I have done.

Why hide it? I have 1.5 years of martin on the real and everything is fine.
 
khorosh:
Why hide it? I have 1.5 years of martin on the real and everything is fine.

I don't mean betting on a martin, but using it at the right time. If you get it right from the start - all credit and praise to you!
 
yosuf:
I don't mean betting on a martin, but using it at the right moment. If you are successful from the start, kudos to you!

I have different options. There is a lot build-up right from the second order, and then there is a delay before the martin is activated.
 
yosuf:
Yes. You need to hide the presence of Martin in the TS algorithm, as I have done. Martin is not applied and implied from the start of the trade, but at the right moment when all other means are exhausted. I think you got it. If not, see my account monitoring.

By the way, I'm sure if you remove your indicator in your Expert Advisor, you can find another one available in the public domain and the results will be no worse or even better. So don't think that the profit of your EAs is ensured by your indicator.
 
khorosh:
By the way, I am sure that if you remove your indicator in your EA, you can find another one available in the public domain and the results will be just as good or even better. So don't think that the profit of your EAs is ensured by your indicator.

I'm sure it's my indicator that ensures the success, and the usefulness of the other indicator has not yet been identified.
 
yosuf:
I am confident that it is my indicator that has ensured success, and the usefulness of the other indicator has yet to be identified.

And I have shown in this thread that if you use a martin, then the EA can work profitably without any indicator at all. If you make a profitable EA with your indicator on condition of one order in the market and constant lot with acceptable drawdown, I will take my hat off to you and believe in miraculous properties of your indicator.
 

Simulation quality 99%

Everyone who has ever dealt with Expert Advisors or trading robots in MetaTrader 4 (MT4) has faced a situation when the results in the strategy tester look just great, while the real trading results show a totally different picture. Generally speaking, there may be many reasons for such a striking difference. Today we will talk about one of them, which is connected with the quality of tick quotes history modeling in MT4 terminal.

The best simulation quality that can be obtained in the MT4 strategy tester by usual methods is 90%. To get it, you need to select the "All ticks" mode in the tester and have the quotes of the smallest timeframe M1 uploaded for the whole testing period. However, even a 90% simulation quality is not always sufficient for estimating the Expert Advisor's performance. Let's analyze why that can happen.

It is well known that historical quotes of all instruments are stored in MT4 in the form of bars (candlesticks) of different timeframes. Each bar contains the open, close, high and low prices for the time frame. The smallest timeframe in MT4 is minutes M1. It means that about every minute of the past history the MT4 terminal "knows" no more than 4 prices. And every trader knows that a lot can happen in a few minutes at the Forex market. When testing an EA in the strategy tester in the "all ticks" mode, the tester tries diligently to fill the "gaps" between the prices it has at its disposal by linearly placing the simulated prices. Needless to say, this has nothing to do with reality?

Taken from http://www.argolab.net/kachestvo-modelirovaniya-99.html

 
Sergssss:

Simulation quality 99%

Everyone who has ever dealt with Expert Advisors or trading robots in MetaTrader 4 (MT4) has faced a situation when the results in the strategy tester look just great, while the real trading results show a totally different picture. Generally speaking, there may be many reasons for such a striking difference. Today we will talk about one of them, which is connected with the quality of tick quotes history modeling in MT4 terminal.

The best simulation quality that can be obtained in the MT4 strategy tester by usual methods is 90%. To get it, you need to select the "All ticks" mode in the tester and have the quotes of the smallest timeframe M1 uploaded for the whole testing period. However, even a 90% simulation quality is not always sufficient for estimating the Expert Advisor's performance. Let's analyze why that can happen.

It is well known that historical quotes of all symbols are stored in MT4 in the form of bars (candlesticks) of different timeframes. Each bar contains the opening (open), closing (close), high and low price for the time period. The smallest timeframe in MT4 is minutes M1. It means that about every minute of the past history the MT4 terminal "knows" no more than 4 prices. And every trader knows that a lot can happen in a few minutes at the Forex market. When testing an EA in the strategy tester in the "all ticks" mode, the tester tries diligently to fill the "gaps" between the prices it has at its disposal by linearly placing the simulated prices. Needless to say, this has nothing to do with reality?

Taken from https://www.mql5.com/go?link=http://www.argolab.net/kachestvo-modelirovaniya-99.html

More advertising! I've thrown the TV away, I'm changing the channel on the radio, but what about you? Read the rules of the forum first, then post before you get banned!
1...424344454647484950515253
New comment
Reason: