Gold Tempo TechnoTrader

LIVE SIGNAL - TechnoTrader EA Showcase

A real account running this EA on the factory defaults, nothing changed, published on MQL5 so you can watch it age. It runs there alongside two other products from the same line, Index Cadence on a US tech index and Bitcoin Interval on Bitcoin, so the account curve belongs to the three together while the numbers on this page belong to this EA alone. It is days old, not years, and we say so before you ask.

Six gold instruments, one chart, one EA

One strategy family: previous-day level breaks, M5 and M15 entries. XAUUSD leads. The five crosses are each restricted to the role they measured best at, not the same rules, and four of them need XAUUSD already holding a position in the same direction.

Two gates sit above the entries. One refuses a stretched market, because a break into a move that already happened fails. The other is the lead confirmation. Exits are a volatility-scaled stop, a trailing stop that moves only in your favour, and a six-hour backstop that closes anything still open.

No weekend exposure, no swaps. Total open risk is capped across all six as one cluster, because six gold pairs are one gold bet, not diversification.

Gold only. This EA wants volatility and gold supplies it. Without follow-through nothing happens, and the weakest stretch in the test is the one where gold did the least.

What you actually get

• Six gold pairs from one XAUUSD M15 chart. One EA, one licence, not six copies.
• Each pair has its own measured session and confirmation. Full role table in the screenshots.
• Nothing held overnight. No weekend gaps, no swap charges.
• Every order carries a verified stop. If the broker drops it, the EA restores it or closes the position.
• One setting to pick, the risk package. The rest ships as measured.
• The free demo runs in your Strategy Tester, on your broker's data, at these defaults.

What it does not do

No martingale. No grid. No averaging into a loser. No news-spike scalping, no sub-minute trades, no hidden recovery logic, nothing held overnight.

Almost every gold EA prints that list. What it decides is how an account dies. Grid and martingale die on one move that never comes back, because the position grows while wrong. Here every position is sized once at entry from your risk setting, with the broker-side stop on before the order is sent, and the whole book is bounded by one shared cap.

That is not safety. Losses come as a grind of losing months, counted in the table below, not as one trade that ends the account.

Daily, weekly and monthly loss brakes block new entries, never open-position management. On a netting account the lead-confirmed module is off entirely at start-up, with a journal note. The figures here are from a hedging account. Use one.

Results

Strategy Tester, not account statements. Default settings, raw-spread data, 200 ms execution delay, M1 OHLC model, 1:100 leverage. No adjectives added. Equity drawdown is MetaTrader's relative figure, which is larger and more conservative than the maximal one.

Quote the 3 000 row. Both columns rise, as proportional sizing should, so the small rows measure the strategy and not the broker's lot floor. About 2.5 trades per active trading day over 615 trading days, longest hold six hours.

Same binary and settings, 2022 to 2024 alone: +222.7% over three years, 48.1% a year, profit factor 1.30, equity drawdown 20.95%, 783 trades. That drawdown is under the full-window figure, so the deepest decline came in strong 2025-2026, not the weak years.

Not regime-proof, and we do not claim it is. The lead symbol's 2020 and 2021 show a bad regime for this mechanism.

The risks, and the numbers they come from

The window is a high-volatility stretch for gold, not a calm sample. Listings publish depth. Almost none publish duration, which is the harder half. A decline that recovers in a month is a different product from one that takes a year. Both are below, on the 3000 reference account over the full window.

The two three-month runs were April to June 2022 and June to August 2023. No fourth consecutive losing month appears, and nothing in the design prevents one.

The 258-day line is the one that ends subscriptions. May 2023 to February 2024, never more than 16.2% down, eight and a half months back to the old peak. If you would switch the EA off mid-way through that, this is not your product. Better to learn it here than with money on it.

Losing trades are the mechanism, not a malfunction. About 45% of trades win. Average win 189.49 against average loss 96.25: fewer, larger wins pay for many small losses. The trades are fast, the product is not. Positions last about two hours, but a system with three-month losing runs is judged in quarters and years, never trade by trade.

Leave it alone. Close one leg yourself and the book is no longer the one that was measured. If a position feels too large, change the risk package or the deposit, not the open trade.

The rest of what can go wrong:

• Regime product. Every figure comes from the window where all six instruments exist on a broker feed. No year here is negative, and that is not a floor, because the window starts in 2022.
• A small account changes who sets position size. Below roughly 3000 the broker minimum lot decides instead of your risk package, and it decides upward: one forced trade can carry up to 4.0% of balance on the lead and 2.0% on a cross. An input lowers that ceiling.
• The gold crosses have wider spreads than XAUUSD. The EA demands proportionally more room from them and skips entries when the live spread is too wide. Cross trades are fewer by design.
• The live record is weeks old at best, the single biggest limitation here. It runs as Techno Gold Tempo, a real account on these defaults, nothing changed, so you can watch it age. No backtest shows slippage on a real fill, a broker widening spreads in a fast market, or a requote. Honest status: measured carefully, not yet proven forward.

Past performance does not guarantee future results, meant literally and not as small print. Everything above measures what already happened on one broker's data, and none of it is a forecast.

Risk packages, one input

Most buyers touch only this setting. The three differ in risk per trade. Signals, sessions and exits are identical. A custom value and a fixed-lot mode are on the same dropdown.

Each step up roughly triples the return and adds a few points of drawdown: return compounds, drawdown does not. Trade count barely moves, because size changes and signals do not. Too much drawdown? Turn the package down. It costs return, not trades.

Year by year

No losing year in the window. Worst +32.0%, best +147.3%. Recent years carry most of the total. Of the 44 rolling twelve-month windows in the test, one is negative.

The same EA on seven brokers

These figures measure execution, not instrument count: every number is XAUUSD alone, the one instrument all seven feeds carry, so the signals are identical and only the fill differs. All seven were re-measured on version 1.2.

Of the five feeds that cover the whole window, the yearly figure runs from 35.5% to 66.6% on 915 to 966 trades. Same signals everywhere: what differs is how much of them survives the fill. The second row is our own broker. We say it before you do.

Coverage is the other broker question. The Gold pairs column is the point: of these seven, two carry all six. The EA skips a missing cross, notes it in the journal and runs on, but with one or two pairs you are running a different EA than this page. Check it before you buy.

The six-pair figures elsewhere on this page come from the feed in the second row, because only two feeds can produce them at all. That is a real limitation and we would rather write it than hide it.

Broker and platform names are their owners' trademarks, naming only the feed a test ran on. TechnoTrader is not affiliated with them, and this is no broker ranking.

Why this period

Not our longest window, but the longest one with real data for all six instruments: XAUGBP and XAUCHF have broker history only from 24 January 2022, and earlier a backtest runs four instruments and reports six. Data availability chose the window. We did not shop for a kinder one.

We did not tune until it passed either. The first three years originally lost money, at a profit factor just under 1.00, so the edge existed and costs ate exactly it. Two measured changes fixed it: a wider stop, meaning a smaller position at fixed risk and proportionally less spread, then per-instrument roles. Both came from a regime inside this window, so these figures are partly in-sample, and forward evidence is only as long as the live account.

Settings and requirements

45 inputs in 11 groups, and the strategy is almost none of them. Sessions, gates, stop and trailing distances and module assignment are compiled in at measured values. You set risk, protection and infrastructure: the risk package, a cross weight, a cluster cap, daily, weekly and monthly loss brakes, an optional year-end pause, a news blackout, prop-firm stops, and panel appearance.

Raw-spread or ECN account, hedging not netting. One XAUUSD M15 chart runs all six instruments. Crosses your broker lacks are skipped automatically and named in the journal. Deposit: 500 floor, 3000 behind this page's figures.

Support: the Comments tab, honest questions get honest answers. Post untested-broker demo results there, it helps the next buyer.

Start on demo, and not for a week: losing runs reach three months. Watch it trade, read the panel, and decide whether you can sit beside it. No number on this page conveys the 258-day wait. Go live once you know your answer.