Discussion of article "General information on Trading Signals for MetaTrader 4 and MetaTrader 5" - page 16

New comment
 
2014.10.07 10:36:22.765 *******: Signal - symbol XAUUSD: not found - only this one with an exclamation mark
 
petr_vanov:

2014.10.07 10:36:22.906 '*******: order sell 0.01 GBPUSD opening at 1.60948 sl: 1.61200 tp: 1.59271 failed[Trade is disabled]

Maybe trading is disabled in the terminal?
 
Is the depo small, although on the cent account I had 7 usd, which translates to 700 cents (also not much, but everything worked)
 
petr_vanov:
2014.10.07 10:36:22.765 *******: Signal - symbol XAUUSD: not found - only this one with an exclamation mark
They seem to have made that the absence of some symbols does not disable trading on others.
 

marketeer:
Может торговля просто запрещена-таки в терминале

same broker, same terminal

 
Thank you all for your help, I figured it out. I lacked a couple of u.u.e. ))))added depo (that more than 100 was) and everything worked. P.S. I apologise for the inconvenience.
 

Hello,

I subscribe to a signal with demo account and i want change it to a live account before the end of subscription.

Can i without loss (unsubscribe demo and subscribe live)?

 

A very interesting service.

It is clear how the service works on forex, there is plenty of liquidity there, given the strong decentralisation of the whole market. But what about signals on hard illiquidity or on instruments with relatively low liquidity (BTCe (hard illiquidity), some MOEX instruments, etc.)? Here the presence of subscribers will make any profitable system of the provider even more profitable, and the "slowest" subscribers or subscribers with large deposits can get losses. Is this the order of things, or will the providers, whose profitability will be very different from the profitability of subscribers, be disqualified from the signals service? Although, to be fair, it is not the supplier's fault that he has a lot of subscribers, who can "sell" the market in favour of the supplier by their following.

 

Of course, the question is interesting, about selling the market - maybe that's what it's all about. I look at the signals - there are a lot of signalers and sellers, and very few subscribers. And where are these hundreds of thousands, but "in the service regularly appear "stars", gaining 1,000 subscribers and earning monthly $20,000 even at the minimum subscription price of $20/month" (c). the question arises: 1. whether everything is really so good. 2. is it not time to discount the prices of intermediaries, as when earning 20 quid or 20% you need to give these 20 back, and a larger amount something yet do not want to risk. All with our holiday of the victory of militia in 612. Good luck

 

It is not clear the moment in the calculation of the ratio of transaction volumes. From the given example:

2. After correction for leverage:

Subscriber1: Subscriber1's leverage (1:200) is greater than the Provider's (1:100), so no leverage correction is made

Subscriber2: 0.1166 * (50 / 100) = 0.0583 (5.83%)

It turns out that Subscriber 2 will have 2 times less profit/loss percentage than the Provider? I.e. if I trade with leverage 1:100 and the supplier 1:500, his stable 10% profit per month will turn into 2% for me?

1...91011121314151617181920212223...36
New comment