What auditing 10 best-selling scalping/martingale EAs on the MQL5 Market taught me
2. How should we treat "no martingale" claims that cannot be verified?
"How should we treat "no martingale" claims that cannot be verified?"
a martingale can be spotted in the live signal or even in backtest
most EAs will split bigger lots into smaller chunks so that the martingale is hidden, but it's there
check for "same opening time" or "same closing time" across multiple orders
I already reported such EAs that claim "no marti" but unfortunately nothing was done about it
i have been burned at this one 3 separate occasions. the sellers defense was always that the increased lotsize on the trade was not a mg because it was a lone, single trade, OR "the last trade was a win, so you are using the profits of the winning trades". what a load of bs. a mg is ANY trade that has a bigger lot than the default trade. call it lotstep or mg; it is using more of the account margin therefore more risk to account, no matter if it is more probable that it will be a win; the same as an mg, no matter the original, techical definition of mg was in the days of our fathers!
Good point on the main underlying premise of Martingale.
What do you check first when judging a Market EA[?]...
Based on my own trading, I recommend looking for an EA that routinely trades 1% of account balance, which is a responsible way to grow your account. As Michael Charles Schefe said above, wild increases in position size should not be trusted. If it walks like Martingale, and talks like Martingale, it's Martingale-ish. Reductions in position sizing (down from 1%), on the other hand, can be trusted for strings of consecutive losses.
most EAs will split bigger lots into smaller chunks so that the martingale is hidden, but it's there
i forgot to add this to my own post, thanks! i often add more trades in profit direction, however, i dont fool myself into thinking that it isnt a mg.
This might be a modification on an old addage -- but exact-amudoo!
Questions for the community:
1. What do you check first when judging a Market EA — the growth curve, the risk rating, the reviews, or something else?
2. How should we treat "no martingale" claims that cannot be verified?
3. Is there any track record length that makes a small-account signal trustworthy to you?
I'd genuinely like to hear how others vet EA purchases — what saved you, and what burned you?
I suggest doing the audit in a different way: check how frequently the EAs are upgraded and which ones have the longest period of time since their last upgrade.
Because, in my opinion, every upgrade is basically just another round of re-optimization and curve fitting, rather than a genuine improvement to the EA.
The MT5 Strategy Tester is exceptionally good if you run backtests using real ticks with 100% modeling quality. So, I would only check EAs that have been unchanged for at least a few weeks since their last upgrade, and run the tests starting from the date of that last upgrade.
The rest are basically irrelevant. The signals can be manipulated. Does anyone actually verify whether the trades shown in the signals correspond to the trades generated by the backtest over exactly the same period?!
Hi all,
In early October 2026, I went through the product pages and public signal track records of ten of the best-selling scalping and martingale-type EAs on the MQL5 Market, and checked every figure twice. I'm not naming any sellers — patterns matter more than people. Here is what kept repeating in that snapshot (signal data changes daily):
- 9 of the 10 carry a high risk rating; the tenth is medium.
- Every profitable-looking signal I checked ran on a $50–300 account (or 100–200 EUR) with 1:500–1:1000 leverage, and the track records spanned only 4–54 weeks.
- All of the paid copy signals in my sample had zero subscribers.
- Around 80% of the profit in most growth curves was earned in the first 1–7 days. The most recent month was negative in several cases, down to −46.94%, and the annualized forecast was about −100%.
- Average losses run 1.85–2.2× the average win — the opposite of what the equity curve suggests.
- Only 3 of the 10 openly declare grid/martingale (one documents a lot-multiplier progression with stop-loss protection disabled by default). The other 7 claim "no martingale", but with closed source there is no way to verify it. I am not claiming anyone lied — disclosure like that is actually a good thing; buyers just need to understand what it means.
- 6 of the 10 have buyer reviews reporting losses or blown accounts, and several sellers appear to delete old signals when results deteriorate, then launch a new EA.
Questions for the community:
1. What do you check first when judging a Market EA — the growth curve, the risk rating, the reviews, or something else?
2. How should we treat "no martingale" claims that cannot be verified?
3. Is there any track record length that makes a small-account signal trustworthy to you?
I'd genuinely like to hear how others vet EA purchases — what saved you, and what burned you?
During the gold rush in Alaska 1896-1904, the sellers of the equipment was the ones that made the money.
Sadly most sellers here in MQL5 don't care about anything else than to sell their products, even if it means they have to lie or delete old signals that was bad in the coming updates.
Even worse, some market and signal service rules can be bent too. This makes it easier for the shady sellers to go on.
To be completely honest, its better to figure out a strategy and code it yourself. You can even use the built in AI-Assistant if you don't know how to code.
The big trouble I see now is the hype to trade gold, which will end in the traders losing all their money and the sellers moving on to the next big hype.
[It's] better to figure out a strategy and code it yourself..
In a perfect world of experienced traders, yes. Unfortunately, most traders are fairly new.
You can even use the built in AI-Assistant if you don't know how to code.
Complicating the matter further... "You can't get the answer that you want if don't know how to frame the question" ([some law professor who I can't remember], 1998). In other words, the trader must at least have sufficient trading experience to talk to AI. It's also helpful to be able to mention specific code elements to AI─especially when AI is being obtuse.
In any event, I code for free so whatever.
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
Hi all,
In early October 2026, I went through the product pages and public signal track records of ten of the best-selling scalping and martingale-type EAs on the MQL5 Market, and checked every figure twice. I'm not naming any sellers — patterns matter more than people. Here is what kept repeating in that snapshot (signal data changes daily):
Questions for the community:
1. What do you check first when judging a Market EA — the growth curve, the risk rating, the reviews, or something else?
2. How should we treat "no martingale" claims that cannot be verified?
3. Is there any track record length that makes a small-account signal trustworthy to you?
I'd genuinely like to hear how others vet EA purchases — what saved you, and what burned you?