Would you sign up for such a signal if I made a 5% drawdown ? - page 9
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
I wrote above that the algorithm will not change. I'm not going to discuss the EA. I just want to know, will people sign up for a signal that makes 100% a year, with a 5% drawdown ?
Of course they will, where will they go?)
Total months of trading (17*12)+5 = 209
Number of trades for the whole period 2868
Average number of trades per month 13.7
Average expected payoff 4,99
Average winnings per month 13,7*4,99 = $68,36
Average winnings per year $820
Initial deposit 10 000$
Average nominal yield, % p.a. 8,2%
VPS Rental price per year 20$*12=240
Actual yield, % APR (before transfer fees, withdrawal fees and taxes) ((820-240)/10 000)*100% = 5.8%.
Basically, profitability exceeds returns on foreign currency deposits, just there is a moment of risk. Yield on the history of quotes cannot promise a future profit - brokers have it written everywhere on their websites.
Formally, the project is accepted, but signal users expect at least 30% per annum, which is comparable to the average yield on client investments under trust management. How else can the risk be justified.
No, well it's just a dummy, I'm not going to trade like that and there won't be such a lot build up, it's a thing of the past. You don't quite get the idea. The number of deals does not matter, because the situation is approximately the same on all major pairs. I have to achieve the minimum drawdown and guarantee of losing profit (as far as possible) and the profit will be derived from orders in profit, in other words, the bot will lead the order to profit and then I will sort it out myself having previously put SL in BU. The drawdown rate remains the same and profit may grow exponentially. Here is an idea for the automatic liquidation of a profitable order.
No, well it's just a dummy, I'm not going to trade like that and there will be no such lot build-up, it's already been passed over. You don't quite get the idea. The number of deals does not matter, because the situation is approximately the same on all major pairs. I have to achieve the minimum drawdown and guarantee of losing profit (as far as possible) and the profit will be derived from orders in profit, in other words, the bot will lead the order to profit and then I will sort it out myself having previously put SL in BU. The drawdown rate remains the same and profit may grow exponentially. Here is an idea for the automatic profit order liquidation.
OK. If the EA has not crapped out in 17 years of history, then there is something in it of course. I have only 3-4 months of tests)) My broker does not load any more and I do not have enough space.
By the way, how long has the testing been going on for 17 years? I would like to test BJH EA but I dont have such an iron like yours. The 1-Order scheme is classical trading - it withstands drawdown or, if I set a 5% limit, it will try to bring it to zero by lot and if it fails, it will close positions with loss on given level. The January and July tests are available there. Is it possible to test this mode on your hardware for 17 years? )))Would you sign up for such a signal if I made a 105% drawdown ?
OK. If the EA hasn't crashed in 17 years of history, then there's certainly something in it. I have only 3-4 months of tests)) I have not downloaded it from my broker and I don't have more space.
By the way how long has the testing been going on for 17 years? I would like to test a BJH EA but I don't have the hardware you have. The 1order trading scheme is classic there - it withstands drawdown or, if I set a 5% limit, it will try to bring it to zero by multiples lot and if it fails, it closes positions with loss on given level. The January and July tests are available there. Is it possible to test this mode on your hardware for 17 years? )))I have a normal computer, I just have an ordinary one.
I have a normal computer, I just do not have much to test. I run on checkpoints for a few minutes, then choose from that and run on all the ticks. The test goes on for about 5 minutes.
I will now try a different calculation of the % per annum, because it shows that the net profit for 17 years is 43%
14,321 = 10,000 * (1+r)^n
where
r - annual interest rate/12/100 = X
n - number of periods = 209
OK, OK... I'll go to the Excel...)
Oh, it's done! 2.06 % p.a. is obtained based on the net profit at the end of the tests.
And this is what will happen in 17 years on deposit if you keep your word about 100% p.a.))
For your reference
I will now try a different calculation of the % per annum, because it shows that the net profit for 17 years is 43%
14,321 = 10,000 * (1+r)^n
where
r - annual interest rate/12/100 = X
n - number of periods = 209
OK, OK... I'll go to the Excel...)
Oh, it's done! 2.06 % p.a. is obtained based on the net profit at the end of the tests.
And this is what will happen in 17 years on deposit if you keep your word about 100% p.a.))
I don't quite understand what you are calculating ?
I will now try a different calculation of the % per annum, because it shows that the net profit for 17 years is 43%
14,321 = 10,000 * (1+r)^n
where
r - annual interest rate/12/100 = X
n - number of periods = 209
OK, OK... I'll go to the Excel...)
Oh, it's done! 2.06 % p.a. is obtained based on the net profit at the end of the tests.
And this is what will happen in 17 years on deposit if you keep your word about 100% p.a.))
For your reference.
Do you share the pelt of the unkilled bear? ))
Share the pelt of the unkilled bear? ))
Yeah)))) It was interesting to see the results of 17 years of stable EA work with a return of 100% per annum.
2 to the tenth power = 1024. In other words, a tenfold doubling increases the deposit by 1000 times