Where did the top 1 signal go? (I won't name it so as not to advertise it) - page 7

 
DZubova:

The signal service was right to show when the signal started to be monitored, you should have at least watched them trade in real life for a while.


So I didn't say they were wrong) It's just that there is no point.

 
Sergey Lobov: я вообще поражаюсь на calculation of the ranking... CALM has gone into a slump but first place is reserved for it... starting with number 2...
 
Sergey Lobov:I'm amazed at therankings calculation... CALM has gone into a slump but first place is reserved for it... starting with number 2...

D)))))

Metacquotes, such metacquotes.

 
Ramiz Mavludov:
The last one who drained 500 subscribers had a 10% drawdown, that's low risk, lots of subscribers, and what would that get you?


Such a signal has ruined its history and cannot ever return to the "low risk" section, but I think low risk in the rating should not only be based on the drawdown level. For example, the signal should combine at least the drawdown, necessarily closed month in the plus, profitability, time... and of course the one who has the best results is ahead)) Of course, ideally there are many other indicators, but I would already be so interested in search and competition.

 
Sergey Lobov:

Yes, it's kind of wrong that the numbers are missing.

Reason: