It depends .
Usually as this is the first idea someone has when starting to code they are missing some key aspects :
We look at the P+L of a "test" or a "trading period" to determine an "EA" is bad . But what if a war broke out that tanked the market and dragged the ea down ?
What if it was a risk event (GDP / CPI / NFP etc) that lead to it losing .
If this is the case and the ea was decent but then lost we see the negative P+L at the end .
If we reverse that we'll get a below good ea and the risk event would make it barely profitable.
But we are not considering the "black swan" events . (In the beginning we don't even know they exist)
So we then look at the "barely profitable" and we keep twisting and turning the sl + tp to no avail .
Then we release that optimized code in the real market and it fails because it was the "black swan" that made it profitable.
Also if that ea is trading multiple assets , you'd have to be "condition" specific and asset specific.
It's an idea only people new to trading can have.
There was a topic about that years ago. It can't work, the main criteria to explain it is the spread.
I will try to find this old topic...
Here it is, with several links inside the topic to all possible arguments and discussions.
We don't need a new topic about it, all has already been said.
- 2016.03.19
- www.mql5.com
It's an idea only people new to trading can have.
There was a topic about that years ago. It can't work, the main criteria to explain it is the spread.
I will try to find this old topic...
Here is is, with several links inside the topic to all possible arguments and discussions.
We don't need a new topic about it, all has already been said.
Don't use the acronym HFT for higher timeframe trading, because it is mainly used for high frequency trading.
It could work for higher timeframe trading, but again it hasn't been proved by anyone we know.
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use