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, 1:100 for all
The thing is that many brokerage companies start with 1:200 (and they don't have 1:100 leverage, it is just absent)
The vast majority of brokerage companies that have such accounts have 1:200 leverage on cent accounts.
That's why it makes sense to set a leverage of 1:200 for all
hmmm... Isn't one look at the Sharpe formula enough for you to see all of the above? An "optimizer" should be able to see it without saying too much... or is it?
Want some examples? Sure. Lots of them.
Especially for this I will open a separate branch, where I will demonstrate the behaviour and absurd results of Sharpe ratio using a large number of examples, but again, one must understand the purposes for which it is intended.
(I'll do it over the weekend)
In the meantime, give an answer to the question:Whatdoes the Sharpe ratio measure?
The Sharpe Ratio is used to determine how well the return on an asset compensates for the risk taken by the investor. When comparing two assets with the same expected return, the investment in the asset with the higher Sharpe Ratio will be less risky.
In other words, the "flatter" the trade, the higher the Sharpe Ratio. The greater the variation in returns, the lower the Sharpe Ratio.
But you already know all this. Why are you being clever? - Just say, so-and-so, my system is a lousy way to gain points according to the competition formula, so what the hell...
For the inattentive readers let me explain - the formula involves three indicators, balance, drawdown and Sharp. Importance coefficients are 1.5, 1.0, 0.5 correspondingly. It means that balance has the largest weight and is determinant of the index. On the second place, the drawdown is very important and it greatly affects the result, while the sharpening has almost no effect on the results. For example, if a participant manages to gain one hundred millions and loses his/her deposit up to immeasurable amounts, his/her score will be very low comparing to those who have increased their deposit insignificantly but kept the drawdown low and besides, the actual sharpness will play very low role in both cases and can even be equal in both examples.
But we do understand what's really causing your discontent, in fact Sharpe is not what you really wanted to "poke around" at. But alas, that's what the second nomination is for - to take into account the effectiveness of account management, and it's not just balance growth (as you usually demonstrated before), but the maximum drawdown, which was made during the entire trade.
me write mt5
I still don't get it, what's on the shoulder?
500?
Is the account currency dollar?
Oleg, got you on the list.
WARNING
Sign up
https://view.new10.top/en/contest/2 May
https://view.new10.top/en/contest/3 July
The thing is that many brokerage companies start with 1:200 (and they don't have 1:100 leverage, it is just absent)
The vast majority of brokerage companies that have such accounts have 1:200 leverage on cent accounts.
That's why it is reasonable to set 1:200 leverage for all
I don't know any brokerage company where the leverage starts from 1:200))
I personally do not pay attention to the leverage, I just look at the price per point.
With any leverage of 100, 300, 500, 1000 the price per point does not change.
You make an entry - and then you see how much you're willing to lose - and therefore you don't care about the leverage.
The Sharpe Ratio is used to determine how well the return on an asset compensates for the risk taken by the investor. When comparing two assets with the same expected return, an investment in an asset with a higher Sharpe Ratio will be less risky.
In other words, the "flatter" the trade, the higher the Sharpe Ratio. The greater the variation in returns, the lower the Sharpe Ratio.
But you already know all this. Why are you being clever? - Just say, so-and-so, my system is a lousy way to gain points according to the competition formula, so what the hell...
For the inattentive readers let me explain - the formula involves three indicators, balance, drawdown and Sharp. Importance coefficients are 1.5, 1.0, 0.5 correspondingly. It means that balance has the largest weight and determines the index. On the second place, the drawdown is very important and it greatly affects the result, while the sharpening has almost no effect on the results. For example, if a participant manages to make a hundred million and loses his/her deposit up to it, he/she will have very low score comparing to those who have slightly increased their deposit and kept drawdowns low, while Sharp will play very low role in both cases and can even be equal in both examples.
But we understand what's really causing your dissatisfaction, in fact, Sharp is not what you really wanted to "poke fun at". But alas, that's what the second nomination is for - to take into account efficiency of account management, and it's not just balance growth (as you usually demonstrated before), but maximum drawdown, which was made during the whole trade.
"and sharpe has practically no effect on the results" --- why would you even put it there in the first place?
But you seem to be unfamiliar with statistics, and its application is unknown to you --- I pointed out the difficulties, but you chose not to notice.
"But we understand"-- that's bullshit.
I personally just don't care about the leverage, I have to look at the price for one pip.
any leverage of 100, 300, 500, 1000 does not change the price per point.
You make an entry - and then you see how much you're willing to lose - and you don't care about the leverage.
For me it makes no difference.
A leverage of 1:1000 is quite acceptable.
But you have to be consistent.
I personally do not pay attention to the leverage, I just look at the price per point.
With any leverage of 100, 300, 500, 1000 the price per point does not change.
You make an entry - and then you see how much you're willing to lose - and therefore you don't care about the leverage.
But what about a level playing field for all participants. Why do brokers use leverage at all?
As for me, I just do not pay attention to the leverage, I have to look at the price for one pip.
at any leverage of 100, 300, 500, 1000 the price per point does not change.
You make an entry - and then you see how much you're willing to lose - and therefore you don't care about the leverage.
That's right, the pip price is the same with any leverage.
But the higher leverage is advocated by who? - That's right, those who like to use a stop out instead of SL. For them, the higher the leverage - the greater the chance to stay afloat in a month of competition. If you are using a competition account (and sometimes with free deposits) - it is the best way not to worry about anything and have a chance to win the prize - the money is not your own!)
You should look at the signalers, who among the top averaging signalers uses accounts with no cents? - No one is stupid, no one wants to risk their own money, and subscriber's money is another matter. The monthly payoff is good enough.