Registration for the MetaQuotes-Demo Championships in May - page 73
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
an hour after I get out of the tub... my smartphone's glitching, I dropped it in the water.
yes.
I seem to have an idea of how to solve the controversy on the "last tick"))
And on Saturday we'll put equity into the formula and recalculate everyone's scores )))) And the question is why have we been looking at different figures all month, the bottom line is the same.
Added in colour
And now you must be writing from a printer? )
No. I was writing from a drowned smartphone. The screen sensor is almost unresponsive to touch. I put the poor thing to dry.
On Saturday we'll put equity into the formula and recalculate everyone's score.) The question arises why we have been looking at different figures all month long, the result is the same.
Do not jump to conclusions)).
In general, the idea is the following, summarizing the battles of several days and taking into account the interests of the parties can still come to an ideal compromise.
Proponents of 'last tick' take the position that some positions may be part of the system and there is no point in closing them just because the competition is coming to an end. However, supporters of counting by balance (myself included) object, they rightly argue that financial results can be considered only for closed positions (besides, there is a chance for dishonest participants to increase equity before the end of the competition, holding positions as "part of the system" while ignoring all associated risks and hoping for luck, thus gaining an advantage over other participants for the first category). Both sides are right. How should this be? After all, businesses outside the financial markets have always had some debt in the form of loans, current outstanding rental debts, a buffer of goods in stock, etc. And this is normal.
The solution is simple. Besides, there is no need for any manual intervention at the end of the competition, thereby eliminating the human factor from the results, and all the necessary data for the calculation is already in the table.
If the system is always in the market (there are always open positions) and the participant claims that the risks are under control and it is not part of a "cunning plan", it means that he does not exceed 30% drawdown. Simple rules follow from this:
Rules for the first nomination:
The winner is the one who has the maximum equity at the end of the competition provided that the maximum drawdown has not exceeded 30% inclusively. If it exceeded, the balance is taken into account but not equity at the end of the contest (it means that there is a probability that the last position was a part of a "cunning plan").
Rules for the second nomination:
The one who gets the highest score calculated by the relative formula <balance+maximum drawdown+c.sharpa> wins. If the maximal drawdown exceeds 30%, the participant is not eligible for the second nomination.
Rules for receiving two prizes in both nominations:
The participant who has the maximum equity (see the rules for the first nomination) and the maximum drawdown has not exceeded 10% wins in both nominations at the same time.
Rules for the cases when the participant cannot qualify for a prize in either of the nominations:
If the participant's balance is less than or equal to the starting balance.
There should be two columns in the table for two nominations (not one for the second nomination as it is now). One column shows the equity or balance (see rules of the first nomination) and the second column the score of the second nomination as now.
For both columns the colouring scheme of results accepted in the last edition of the table is accepted.
That's all. All interests are taken into account, machinations and manipulations are excluded, winners will not remain unnoticed and cunning scoundrels (heh heh ...) will be dethroned in the basement of the table...
Good luck to all in the competition (not luck - luck is part of chance, but success - a meaningful result)!
Contest results only by balance, no equity, otherwise I will win if I don't open a single trade from the start of the contest.
No, you won't. See the rules. Edited (correction)
Thanks for the comment.
With the rules as I have set out above, there is no need for minimum transaction limits. Everything is already accounted for in the rules, including the risks.
In my opinion, there are no more loopholes.