Registration of participants, for the Real Accounts (Cents) Championship, August 2017 - page 5
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
To do this, we need to clearly and unambiguously define the aims and objectives of this very second nomination. Not vaguely and indefinitely...
However, I think that such a "second nomination" is completely unnecessary.
One must first hone this "second nomination" by contest results, only then, perhaps, accept it. There is no easy way out. For example, it is claimed by a contestant with only 0.25 cents of profit, which shows that the formula for calculating this nomination is untenable.
That's my point. You need to look at equity gains, drawdowns and risks. If this data is good, then the manager is OK. If the drawdown is large and the increment is small, but the trade was entered at half of the deposit and the profit was achieved through this very trade, then this signal is not worth five Soviet kopecks.
All in all, you have to calculate it somehow.
Oleg, more on that please
A prize fund is a serious business, so you need to know how it works.
Fund balance, how it should be spent (you don't have to spend it all on the current month's prizes), minimum and maximum monthly values, and how the balance should be left for payments (prizes) in future periods, maybe in some percentage ratio.
The prize pool is used to pay out prizes, so it has to be specified how much of the pool is used for prizes in the current month (or not in the current month) and how much of the remainder enables prizes to be paid out in the next month (and the following months).
That's in a nutshell. There are a lot of nuances. There is a lot of work to be done.
That's my point. You need to look at equity gains, drawdowns and risks. If this data is good, then the manager is OK. If the drawdown is large and the increment is small, but the trade was entered at half of the deposit and the profit was achieved through this very trade, then this signal is not worth five Soviet kopecks.
Anyway, you have to calculate it somehow.
I think it would be better to organize a parallel contest for this ;)) A competition to identify the individual"manager normal"
That's my point. You need to look at equity gains, drawdowns and risks. If this data is good, then the manager is OK. If the drawdown is large and the increment is small, but the trade was entered at half of the deposit and the profit was achieved through this very trade, then this signal is not worth five Soviet kopecks.
All in all, you have to calculate it somehow.
You can calculate it, but I'm afraid there will be no data to take it from.
I would set it at 1:1000 at my brokerage house (my signal).
I have no idea what it is about the leverage.
Welcome to the competition!
To apply for the Augusta competition, click here.
I would set it at 1:1000 at my brokerage house (my signal).
i don't give a fuck if i lose, it means there are fewer bidders for the win. i need a bigger leverage - i don't give a fuck what kind of leverage it is !
i also don't give a fuck what kind of leverage it is!
NON STOP - Run for August , only $10 each ...
I would take part if there was an article and the first place signal could become worth $10. Thus, the signal becomes more attractive and it is much steeper than the prize money. And then, as MQL himself says, subscribers will choose their idol.