DT INTRADAY 7

renewed my subscription. believing in this signal. to the author, hope you learned from your trade last 5/29/2026.

No SL on new trade, make no sens. 0 support from the author, he read the msg but dont answer. I dont recomand

Normally there would be a stop loss, but sometimes there isn't. Usually only one trade has no stop loss, but currently there are three trades without a stop loss. This is risky and inconsistent with the strategy. The signal provider should consider adjusting this to make the system more sustainable.

Let’s pray together that EU flies up. If it doesn’t, we’re done for — having no SL is so painful. We really shouldn’t trust any strategy where the strategy owner only has $161 in the account.

Be careful with this signal; it's dangerous because the publisher can't communicate. Some positions have no stop-loss at all, which is very risky and can wipe out your account. The publisher is constantly adding and removing other signals.

As written on May 10, 2026:

There's a lot I like about this signal: it's diversification from the many others that focus on gold, yet without the high equity drawdown and long holding times typical for most other Forex currency pair signals.

There's no visible SL/TP on these trades, but they are almost always closed in either profit or loss within the day. As an exception, now there's a trade left open over the weekend.

On rare occasions, there were 2 (later edits: or 3 or 4 or 5) concurrent trades. I don't know if more may be opened - I tried asking the provider via direct message here, and my message is seen as read, but I got no reply (later edit: and a further ping message is unread for days). Unfortunately, this kind of information isn't currently in the signal's description either - I think it should ideally be added to there.

I'm a bit concerned the signal account's balance is so small, meaning the provider's only financial motivation is retaining and growing the subscriber base - not also making a trading profit directly. I guess the deposit was so small in part because this signal was one of many - as the description says, "DT INTRADAY is a portfolio of intraday strategies", and this one was number 7. I saw some of them before they were deleted - I didn't see any outright blow their accounts, but they were not as successful as this one. So I'm also a bit concerned that we got selection bias here. However, that's history, which needs to be retained, and now we proceed from what we have. I do appreciate the clean history - just one 100 EUR deposit, no withdrawals.

The copying quality to another broker is very good for me. My broker's commissions are much smaller than what I see most other brokers offer, so that isn't a problem for me, unlike in Juan's review here. (Please feel free to message me about the broker.)

Update on May 15:

The provider keeps increasing the subscription price (36, 39, now 42) while not replying and now not even reading direct messages here, thus deliberately providing no user support. That's a fine choice by them - there's no obligation to provide support here - but I lower the user support rating to 1/5 to reflect this choice.

Update on May 25:

I analyzed the trades I got in 4 weeks. There were up to 3 concurrent trades, which includes up to 2 trades with tight yet virtual (invisible to broker and subscriber) SL/TP and occasionally 1 more trade seemingly without any SL (or with very far SL that was never hit so far), which could be held for a long time (max 5 days including a weekend during this period) while the other kind of trades are being made and closed within hours as usual.

Further, per my analysis adding real SL of 0.10% or 0.11% of price to that third trade (or all trades in addition to their tighter virtual SL of 0.03% to 0.05%) would have kept the strategy profitable (at least during the period I analyzed) while reducing risk and allowing for much larger trade sizes (which would easily more than compensate for this SL being hit on rare occasions). Similarly, since very few of the trades are kept beyond virtual TP of 0.05% to 0.07% anyway (so far one 0.08% and one 0.20%), a real TP at 0.06% or 0.07% could occasionally help. I'm just sharing this as a curiosity. (I use percentages out of habit, since that's what I use in my EAs lately.)

Update on June 5:

It was up to 4 concurrent trades today, the first time I see this many here. One EURUSD buy held for many days now (the one seemingly without even a virtual SL) and 3 more of the usual kind. Not a grid, just concurrent trades in same direction, each opened and closed at its own time, and with more of these trades getting opened during favorable price movement (the opposite of what a grid would do). These produced good profit at acceptable risk.

Update on June 8:

A larger loss was accepted later on June 5 - looks like that multi-day trade has SL at 1% or so. It would long have hit my own SL at 0.10%, and wouldn't matter afterwards. However:

Today 5 trades would have hit my suggested SL at 0.10%, 4 of them were actually closed in profit here, 1 is still open. Also, 5 trades are open now, all of them in floating loss. I've never seen so many concurrent trades here before, and I never seen many reach my SL at 0.10%. So it looks like this strategy may have been adjusted by the provider after the larger loss, or just got its virtual SL distance increased to accommodate increased volatility. That's a pity for me as it invalidates my unintended use of this signal. My own problem, indeed.

In better news, the subscription price dropped from $48 to $30, and two other signals in this family were recreated (numbers 1 and 3).

Final update on June 26:

The signal performed OK for typical subscribers throughout June, but many of the trades (including several concurrently) had equity drawdown way beyond the SL levels that would have worked until the end of May, making this signal unsuitable for me. Monthly growth is now shown by MQL5 as 10%, which for me is too low to justify the risk of following a signal. Maximum equity drawdown so far is 8%, which on its own isn't bad at all, but in signals I'm generally looking for a better ratio of monthly growth vs. drawdown.

Other DT signals have changed again - 1 and 3 are gone again, but 4 is available since June 22 priced $45. Such juggling of the signals hides their previous max equity drawdown from prospective subscribers because MQL5 only calculates that metric for the short period since signal re-listing (e.g., just over 4 days for the re-listed signal 4 now, not over its account history of 2 months). This may mislead inexperienced signal subscribers.

The price here is now increased to $75. Well, I'm also following a better performing Forex pair signal currently priced $40 where the provider actually answers questions. So I'll stop following this one.

Overall, this is a good signal, it's just not good enough for me anymore.

I really like this signal, but unfortunately, the profit margin is taken up by my broker's commissions (ICMARKETSSC), which are higher than RoboForex. I can't open a Robo Forex account because I'm a European citizen. Does anyone know how I can fix this? Otherwise, I'll have to cancel my subscription. Thanks!

Update June 5, 2026:

I'm glad to see there's a stop-loss for those open trades that usually end up profitable.

Actualización Junio, 9:

Todos estamos viendo un comportamiento de la señal diferente a lo habitual. Más arriesgada, es cierto. A falta de una explicación por parte del desarrollador (algo sumamente recomendable para esta comunidad), en mi opinión, el EA ha entrado en modo "recovery" y se estabilizará cuando alcance el punto anterior a la gran caída.