What does a fair formula for rating Signals look like? - page 3
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
Here are the signals... subscriptions... Better yet, how can a product plummet 20 positions in the rankings in just a few hours?
Who's spinning what? I mean, there were sales today and trial downloads coming in. Suddenly, all of a sudden, there's a drop in the rankings.
It was about subscriptions. And it's not about numbers, it's about money.
Well, what if the rating is equated to votes. Whoever has more votes has a higher rating. You can vote for a signal only once....
If you do not have a good balance, you will get a bonus.
The only way to do this is to use your own money. My money is the only way to measure the drawdown. The balance is a random thing.
4000 rows, each row for a different signal. and in the columns - all the signal parameters, how many days since monitoring, how many deals on it, initial balance, maximum drawdown, MO, increment, sharpe factor, recovery factor, profit factor. and in general, all the ratios that are in the table under the signals.
then you could create another column in this table and write in it your formula for determining the quality of signals. multiply there the trading period by the sharpe coefficient by the profit-factor, divide by the maximum series of losses.... And then sort the table by this column.
then everyone will be able to come up with their own formula for sorting signals! And this will eliminate the eternal complaints to the meta-automates, saying that the signal ratings are sorted incorrectly.
A trader opened 100 accounts, traded for a couple of months and then the best one added signals to the service.
and all parameters will be the same!
I agree!!! But the size of the provider's own funds is also important, as it's one thing for a person to manage from one, it's another thing to manage a million.
Whatever we imagine here, whatever formulas we come up with, it will only be a formalised idea of what a signal should be from an investor's point of view. This view has nothing to do with MQ's view of signals (this is neither bad nor good, just business - nothing personal), because MQ has no interest in the success of any particular signal, the interest is in how best to sell "the whole tavar in stock". It is perfectly understandable, and confirmed by Renat's words, why this warehouse is systematically "overfished" in order to sell stale goods. This is why the fomula is constantly, or even dynamically, rearranged, from time to time shuffling goods on the shelves, moving expired goods closer to the customer, this is done everywhere, in supermarkets and googleplay and in the signal service and in the marketplace.
"I have shagged parliament and will continue to shag parliament." (С)
That's right. Isn't it too much?
Wouldn't it be easier to leave the rating on signal Providers themselves? Those who are confident in their signals and deposit a large amount - those are worthy of the highest rating. And if a Provider is so unsure of his signal that he is afraid to deposit even a hundred quid - to me, it is an indication that the Provider does not care about the signal quality - he is thinking only about how to get more money from Subscribers.
Not a fact by far: I've seen a Vietnamese man who was struggling for his 200 quid and saw 10k of ISP's money just flow away. Thought 10k was some kind of guarantee. No one knows who's on the other end and how much they value their money. I have also encountered accounts worth millions, as I understand it, PAMM. But this can only be guessed from the movement of money (if you know how else - write).
But it is a normal formula, I say as someone who uses a search engine in signals and looks through 10-20 pages while I calm down.
The only thing that would be really missing - data downloading by EN signals and then analyze the software or excel. I tried to log in to the site (to go through the signals programmatically) through WebRequest, but, as I understand, it is no longer possible
Whatever we imagine here, whatever formulas we come up with, it will only be a formalised idea of what a signal should be from an investor's point of view. This view has nothing to do with MQ's view of signals (this is neither bad nor good, just business - nothing personal), because MQ has no interest in the success of any particular signal, the interest is in how best to sell "the whole tavar in stock". It is perfectly understandable, and confirmed by Renat's words, why this warehouse is systematically "overfished" in order to sell stale goods. This is why the fomula is constantly, or even dynamically, rearranged, from time to time shuffling the goods on the shelves, moving expired goods closer to the customer, this is done everywhere, in supermarkets and googleplay and in the signal service and in the marketplace.
"I've fucked over parliament and I will continue to fuck over parliament." (С)
You are wrong on all counts.
now the client pays $20 for the signal. MetaQuotes receives 20% of this money, i.e. $4.
I think it would be profitable for the company to add another type of payment for signals(percentage of profit).