An imbalance of subscribers among signal providers

New comment
 

We are trying to get MQL5 management to make corrections concerning the display of subscribers of signal providers. Unfortunately, showing subscribers with a critical gap between the first and other signal providers by a factor of 4, or 10 for most providers, is not a friendly environment for providers with the minimum number of subscribers.

The choice of potential subscribers becomes not quite sober, as most providers choose the signal with the biggest number of subscribers.

We suggest that the MQL5 management introduce the following changes.

If a signal has more than 100 Subscribers, e.g. 450, the signal should be displayed in the manner of 100+. However, if a Subscriber selects this signal, it will be available for displaying all Subscribers (450). Also the ISP itself sees the number of subscribers.

This change would be more equitable for all providers, and the selection of subscribers would be more sober.

Please support us in this initiative. Please votehttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/162863.

Do not develop other ideas in these threads.

 
Subscriber statistics (10.12.2016):
Total number of subscribers: >2904
Number of subscribers of the first provider by total subscribers: 836 (28.78% of the total number of subscribers).
Number of subscribers of the first five providers by total subscribers: 1379 (47.48% of the total number of subscribers).
 
I personally, on the contrary, to have more information available for analysis, I would open up the sales figures in the marketplace as well.
 
Subscriber statistics (18.12.2016):
Total number of subscribers: >2768
Number of subscribers from the first provider by total subscribers: 948 (34.25% of the total number of subscribers).
Number of subscribers from the first five providers by total subscribers: 1,447 (52.28% of the total number of subscribers).
 

What makes you think this ratio is unhealthy. This is the current market reality and preference.

That is the way this market works, that is its model.

 
Subscriber statistics (24.12.2016):
Total number of subscribers: >2635
Number of subscribers of the first provider by total subscribers: 1002 (38.03% of the total number of subscribers).
Number of subscribers of the first five providers by total subscribers: 1,500 (56.93% of the total number of subscribers).
 

For me, it makes no difference.

If the signal is profitable and stable, it does not matter what statistics are out there.

Of course, if the signal has turned out to be profitable as a result of chance, it is a shame to lose an opportunity to cheat suckers and get subscribers.

 
There are more scalpers in honour with a maximum profit of 20 pips (4 signs).Just I do not understand what common sense is watching, if you consider delays, slippage, at least from this profit will end up 70% at best.Probably just the human factor.Trader likes when he gets a lot and often ...)))
 
I agree with the author completely and have nothing to add.
 

The "crowd effect" is a key factor in assessing the behaviour of financial markets. Therefore, no one will hide such indicator as "number of subscribers". Without this indicator, any signal is mundane and unremarkable. Just compare the signals of TOP-10 with signals of TOP-10 and it will be clear that these signals are not remarkable and do not differ at all. Except, of course -- the number of subscribers. Even the indicator "growth", which is not "growth" even from the point of view of statistical terms[https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/10603/page227#comment_2841979]-- even that doesn't attract subscribers as much as "number of subscribers".

"Number of subscribers" I would call "crowdfunding" as opposed to the well-known "peer review".

Conclusion: the "number of subscribers" indicator should not be removed. It's an indicator of crowd interest. It is the funniest metric. Without it, the signals service will drastically become "gray" for both participants and popcorn lovers.

p.s. By the way, the indicator "number of subscribers" does not have such a key weight in assessing the ranking of the signal in the TOP. Several times in the last month the first signal of the TOP has changed the value of "increment" to a sharply lower one and rolled back about twenty of the TOP.

In other words, it is not necessary to have a huge number of subscribers to be at the top - much depends on the quality of the signal itself.

 
Andrey F. Zelinsky:

The "crowd effect" is a key factor in assessing the behaviour of financial markets. Therefore, no one will hide such indicator as "number of subscribers". Without this indicator, any signal is mundane and unremarkable. Just compare the signals of TOP-10 with signals of TOP-10 and it will be clear that these signals are not remarkable and do not differ at all. Except, of course -- the number of subscribers. Even the indicator "growth", which is not "growth" even from the point of view of statistical terms[https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/10603/page227#comment_2841979]-- even that doesn't attract subscribers as much as "number of subscribers".

"Number of subscribers" I would call "crowdfunding" as opposed to the well-known "peer review".

Conclusion: the "number of subscribers" indicator should not be removed. It's an indicator of crowd interest. It is the funniest metric. Without it, the signals service will drastically become "gray" for both participants and popcorn lovers.

p.s. By the way, the indicator "number of subscribers" does not have the highest weight in assessing the ranking of the signal in the TOP. Several times in the last month the first signal of the top has changed the value of "increment" to a sharply lower and rolled back about thirty of the top.

I.e. to be at the top positions in the top does not have to have a huge number of subscribers - it all depends on the quality of the signal itself.

Quality, yeah. I was crawling into TOP 100 out of 5000 in couple of months, just by testing, without any subscribers. Then I deleted the signals. In the marketplace depends on purchases ranking, not in the signals.
123456789101112
New comment
Reason: