Discussion of article "Trading Signals in MetaTrader 5: A Better Alternative to PAMM Accounts!" - page 7
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
I'm sorry, but don't you think your demands are a bit excessive? Maybe a person is just getting on the path of truth. Maybe in a month he will have a deposit of $1000 and everything will be fine.
And you are so immediately, at the root - "... Fuck. When will you (storytellers) have a conscience? ...". Do you want all the signals to hit with reals, and even with a deposit of at least $1000?
No, to help with a kind word, good job, keep up the good work, to raise the provider's spirit, so that he does not think that all the cool traders with at least $1000 on their accounts are here. Anyway, subscribers will not read a post somewhere on the forum about some signal, I think it will be more important for them to have information on the signal page.
And where else can they train? Your right to subscribe or not, nobody is forcing you.
With such intentions you can disperse all signal providers.
PS. Nothing personal.
You should train and get on the path of truth - you need to use your own money.
But if someone who wants to "practice" becomes a signal provider, he must take responsibility.
There is only one way to take responsibility in the case of signal delivery - it is to broadcast a signal from a real account with the minimum amount on the account specified in the rules + broadcast history for reliability.
The fact that all information is visible and the subscriber is free to decide whether to subscribe or not - this is the responsibility of the resource administration, which provides the platform and takes the commission.
For paid subscription there should be only real accounts with the minimum amount specified in the rules and the period of verification not less than 3-6 months.
All demo accounts have a place, but for non-paid subscription.
abolk:
For a paid subscription there should be only real accounts with a minimum amount specified in the rules and a verification period of at least 3-6 months.
All demo accounts are available, but for non-paid subscription.
Abolk is right, you need time filtering and only real accounts, otherwise "protection from scammers" and no comparison with PAMMs is out of the question. Although in my opinion it is not necessary to compare it with PAMMs, as these are two absolutely different services. If you develop it as an ordinary signal and do not worry about additional security issues, you can use demo accounts and accounts with any history.
The TS must first of all be viable. Any TS can show the required "number of pips in turnover", and even on the demo.
But only a few can show profitable stability for a quarter or a year.
As for the choice of "high-frequency" and "low-frequency" - it is a matter of taste. The main criterion is the ability to give the declared profit during the declared conditionally long period of time. There are different risks - to fail with a TS that has lived for half a year, and with a TS that has lived for a week or two. At the moment, the market cyclicity is fleeting - a full cycle occurs in 3-6 months, which includes a versatile trend of critical amplitude and a flat of critical duration. If the TS withstands this cycle, it makes sense to invest in its signals.
How can the system's profitability be evaluated in pips?
Abolk is right, we need time filtering and only real accounts
abolk, as well as those who parrot along with him, are wrong, because what he suggests has been implemented for a long time. You just need to learn how to use it correctly.
abolk as well as those parroting along with him are wrong, as what he proposes has been implemented long ago. You just need to learn how to use it correctly.
Filters do not solve the problem, because a lot of users are illiterate in investments and if they are not protected by bans, they will never find all these filters, because they do not understand why it is necessary to limit the list, especially if there are"grails" in it. Thirst for profit most often overpowers common sense, so restrictions should be introduced at the stage of allowing signals to be subscribed for a paid subscription. Actually, I myself am in favour of removing any restrictions and replacing them with filters. But then it is necessary to give up claims for any protection of investors from "swindlers". A competent investor can protect himself in any case, even if there are no filters at all.
Filters don't solve the problem:
If you don't use them, they don't solve it. I, for example, am a rock lover and don't like clucking and finger-pointing rap. But rap doesn't interfere with my life because I don't listen to it - I filter it.
But the lack of filters, for example, calculation of profit by balance, not by equity - this is really a problem that users are not able to solve, because nothing is filtered here.
A vivid example of this is the first place in the tops of the signals service for MetaTrader 5:
Now let's see what he actually has there:
And we see there that the trader has already drained most of the initial deposit and all the funds he used to fund his account.
But the successful drainer IvanIvanov once again managed to bring his account to the first place in the rating and has subscribers.
How to filter this crap? It turns out that we can't use the service's standard tools.
But abolk and all sorts of others demand from developers what has been implemented for a long time, thus diverting the conversation and attention of developers from the real problems of the service, allegedly in order to save deposits of illiterate investors.
But abolk and all sorts of others demand from developers what has been implemented for a long time, thus diverting the conversation from the real problems of the service.
The real problem of the service is that the service is in the stage of formation. Any system is considered multifaceted.
At the moment, the filter of signals is implemented, but not an administrative mechanism to protect gullible "investors" from the signal providers who are wise enough to make a lottery.
The errors shown in the example should be identified and corrected in the order of their importance. The presence of such errors is not a reason to gloss over other, for example, organisational problems. And it is not a reason to beat oneself in the chest about how all-seeing Reshetov is, and the others are only interfering.
The real problem of the service is that the service is in its infancy. Any system is considered in a multifaceted way.
At the moment, a filter of signals is implemented, but not an administrative mechanism of protection of gullible "investors" from the signal providers who are wise in the field of lotteries.
The errors shown in the example should be identified and corrected in the order of their importance. The presence of such errors is not a reason to gloss over other, for example, organisational problems. And it is not a reason to beat oneself in the chest about how all-seeing Reshetov is, and the others are only interfering.
There are problems that can be eliminated to a greater or lesser extent, if you use standard means implemented in the service, for example, filters.
And there are problems that allow to misinform subscribers, lovers of lottery deletion, bypassing the imperfections of the service.
Your suggestions in the spirit of deleting what can be easily filtered are not solutions, but only personal whims and lusts.
Maybe someone can show a decent result on a demo account, so why persecute him? Maybe a trader does not want to publicise his real profits on real accounts? Maybe the investor does not allow him to publish his account in signals? Or maybe he just decided to try his luck? How many reasons can there be? Then let him show the results on demo accounts. Who does not like it, can filter it out.
In fact, if you look, most of the signals are rubbish, regardless of whether they are real or demo. If there was a guarantee that a real signal is more reliable than a demo signal, then we could talk about it. However, if you look at the bottom of the rating, you can clearly see that everyone is drained, regardless of the real account. And those who have been hanging out on the forum for a long time can remember when accounts of several thousand quid were publicly drained. Here is an example: A novice trader works on a real account on Elliott Waves (invest - password is attached)....
After all, for some people a ten thousand bucks is just to have a good time, and for others a hundred greenbacks is just to live till the payday. That's why it is impossible to cut everyone under the same mould. There will still be those who will publicly sip money to show their greatness. But to propose mechanisms for screening out the naked scammers who have taken blatant places in the tops - the very thing.
I, for example, have already suggested that after each destroyed depo, leakers should be given a temporary ban in the form of a ban on creating new signals in the service, for example, for 1 month, or even longer. This measure would at least partially slow down the process of clogging the service with signals with excessively risky TS. But nobody hears, because there are other opinions.