Registration for the MetaQuotes-Demo Championships in May - page 42
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
No, there should be a balance in the formula as all positions should be closed at the end of the competition.
This is the only way
Just like that.
Balance? That's weird. Well, are we going to keep track of the second nomination during the whole competition? Or are we only going to find out the winner at the end (taaaaac, he's currently on line 5, but after all the trades are closed he'll be on line 1, .... "1 in writing, 7 in mind" ).
And what points can a participant get if, for example, his equity is less than the starting equity. Put a cut-off point - 0 points for such trades.
If we focus on the Sharp's coefficient, we get that a participant with an 80% drawdown and equity = 30% of the initial drawdown gets practically the first place in the second nomination.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/286562?p=15ovz
And we will look at such signals in the table until the end of the championship (with respect to the contestants, just discussing the formula).
P.s. I was a bit hasty with the first place, but the probability that the Participants keep good indices at the top of the list without closing the losing trades is not good. As for the formula for the second nomination, did I miss something and sharpe is not taken into account?
Balance? That's weird. Well, are we going to keep track of the second nomination during the whole competition? Or are we only going to find out the winner at the end (taah, he's in fifth place now, but will be in first place after all the trades are closed, .... "1 in writing, 7 in mind" ).
And what points can a participant get if, for example, his equity is less than the starting equity. Put a cut-off point - 0 points for such trades.
If we focus on the Sharp's coefficient, we get that a participant with an 80% drawdown and equity = 30% of the initial drawdown gets practically the first place in the second nomination.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/286562?p=15ovz
And we will look at such signals in the table until the end of the championship (with respect to the contestants, just discussing the formula).
P.s. I was a bit hasty with the first place, but the probability that the Participants keep good indices at the top of the list without closing the losing trades is not good. For the second nomination formula, did I miss something and sharpe is not taken into account?
Balance? That's weird. Well, aren't we going to keep track of the second nomination throughout the competition? Or are we going to find out the winner at the end? (taaaac, he is on the fifth position now, but after all trades are closed, he will be on the first position, ....). "1 in writing, 7 in mind" ).
And what points can a participant get if, for example, his equity is less than the starting equity. Put a cut-off point - 0 points for such trades.
If we focus on the Sharp's coefficient, we get that a participant with an 80% drawdown and equity = 30% of the initial drawdown takes practically the first place in the second nomination.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/286562?p=15ovz
And we will look at such signals in the table until the end of the championship (with respect to the contestants, just discussing the formula).
P.s. I was a bit hasty with the first place, but the probability of that one gets good results that keep him/her at the top of the list without closing the losing trades is not good. As for the formula for the second nomination, did I miss something and sharpe is not taken into account?
And during the competition, too, according to the balance.
The point is that the formula of the second nomination takes into account the maximum drawdown of equity which is shown on the left side of the monitoring page as " Maximum drawdown:". And the balance is an indicator of what has already been "put into cache". Besides, such words as "I could have fixed a profit" are of no use as it does not make any sense to discuss trading in the past tense.
Of course, the equity graph is very important as it demonstrates the strategy's ability to increase the balance (if equity is above the balance most of the time). And we still have sorting by equity.
Besides, you can't spread equity on bread, and all the contests take into account the balance at the end of the competition and all positions must be closed (closed positions - here, look how much I can spread on bread).
Now, we can observe the following situation with many participants: equity is 500-1000 points above the entrance and the participants are on the top, while the positions are actually closed in a few points above/below the entrance. It is important not only to demonstrate the ability to increase equity, but to timely deposit this equity in cash, otherwise there is no profit to be made from this enormous increase in equity.And during the competition, too, by balance.
The point is that the formula for the second nomination takes into account the maximum equity drawdown, which is called " Maximum drawdown:" on the left-hand side of the monitoring page. And the balance is an indicator of what has already been "put into cache". Besides, such words as "I could have fixed a profit" are of no use as it does not make any sense to discuss trading in the past tense.
Of course, the equity graph is very important as it demonstrates the strategy's ability to increase the balance (if equity is above the balance most of the time). We still have sorting by equity.
Besides, we cannot spread equity on bread and all contests take into account the balance at the end of the contest and all positions have to be closed (i.e. positions are closed, so look how much money I can spread on bread).
I see what you mean. About equity throws to the plus side on history. Of course they should not be taken into account.
But I don't agree with the association with "grease", you can grease the current equity, not the balance.
I know what you mean. Equity throws to the plus side on history. Of course they should not be taken into account.
But I don't agree with the association with "fudging". You can fudge the current equity, but not the balance.
Will the broker let you withdraw the equity?
Yes ) But the balance will not.
Ask your broker to withdraw the balance fromhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/286562?p=15ovz
Yes ) And the balance is not.
Ask your broker to withdraw the balance fromhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/286562?p=15ovz
Heh...))
So just when you withdraw from the deposit they will look at what the balance would have been if you closed all the positions. You are given a withdrawal from the balance that would have been when the positions were closed. Your wife and children are not interested in your equity, they are interested in how much you can withdraw from the deposit.
Heh...))
So just when you withdraw from the deposit, they will look at what will be the balance if you close all positions. You are allowed to withdraw from a balance that would have been at closed positions.
You may withdraw only as much as your current equity. So, your statements about grease remain in force.
And it's strange to hear that in general."And the balance sheet is an indicator of what is already 'put in the cache'". It's not an indicator of anything. There is no cache behind the balance.
Man, it's like a parallel universe, tried to overcome cognitive dissonance, to comprehend and say to myself, but why could it be so????
I tried to overcome cognitive dissonance to think about it and say to myself: "Why is it possible to do this at") Ah, you can trade to stop-out, but if you manage to do it in time, you take your balance from the table ))
Igor Volodin:
1. Так вот вывести дадут ровно столько сколько у вас текущая эквити.
2. So the smear statements still stand.
1. That's yours.
2. And this one is mine.
The first is wrong (absurd).
Again, on the fingers.
a) You have 10'000 on your balance and equity shows 100'000. You want to withdraw 100'000, but you can do it when you close all positions and then the balance will be 100'000.
b) You have 10'000 on your balance and equity shows 20'000. You want to withdraw 20,000 but you will be able to do it when you close all your positions and the balance will reach 20,000.
It means that you can withdraw after closing the position. Until then, until you go to your personal office, create an order for withdrawal, equity may be lost, up to a margin call. What is the use of the fact that the equity has reached 100,000? If you don't get it in time, there's no money.