Is this EA good based on backtest? - page 2
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
Modeling quality drops with shorter time frames. So what does it measure? By the way, I hope that you're on some island in the bahamas if your model of 90% performs live at that rate! lol
Eric79, a member in another forum (HarryHid) says that the modelling quality number represents the overall quality of the tick data used - not the quality of the model. There is a description on the Metaquote site forum that describes the tester, but the description of modelling quality is hard to decipher. Essentially, it says % of data which is why EA's in faster time frames have typically higher percentages (more time slices). Any other thoughts?
Ok,..I'll try to explain according to my experience. Let say,..you have 90% modeling quality or higher. If your signal exist on a little tick and hold a about 0.001... second, will the strategy test count it? yes,..it counted, but is the trade in realtime will executed on that critical moment even your eyes can't see the movement? The point is when strategy tester count all signal whith perfect result, Our EA dont have enough time to do that executions on very little flash tick.
How ever, whitout backtest our job will be more difficult. Unfortunately we can't trust our dog 100%. He will bite you sometime...:D
Modeling quality drops with shorter time frames. So what does it measure? By the way, I hope that you're on some island in the bahamas if your model of 90% performs live at that rate! lol
Lol.. you're right. I can backtest with 90% modelling quality but i don't have an EA with such a nice equity curve
That's what made me doubt the quality of the test..
Eric79,
I think I will post the quality question on the metaquotes.net forum to see what they say. I personally think that it is related to the quantity of available data that a model uses in making decisions. My EA is programmed to get into a trade very, very late versus early as many others attempt and exit the same way so that I ride across the midpoints of peaks and troughs. This way, timing is not as critical and my accuracy may be just above 50% so I'm running in the middle of the "pack" and miss many headfakes. I don't use many of the trade triggers that my indicator generate so, maybe that is why I am at only 44%!?
We all know that you don't need to be 90% accurate to win in this business since even a casino will blacklist you if you can develop even a 3% advantage over the "house." Still, there are many 80% accurate manual traders. I just don't know of any EA's with that long term hit rate.
Yes. But i'm not sure wheter we have a misunderstanding now. English is not my normal language. Modelling quality of 90% does not mean a hit rate of 90% winning trades of course. Modelling quality and hit rate have nothing to do with each other.
Edit: Apart from the fact that a test with a higher modelling quality will probably give you a more accurate idea of the strategy's hit rate than a test with a low modelling quality.