Proposal to the organisers of the Championship - 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
The rules will have to change if you want to popularise robot trading. I'm sick and tired of looking at insignificant MACD variations, which are only useful for the time of the Championship. In the meantime, it is better not to put them on the real market, because a lot of people know very well what their real value is.
I'm for less monkeys. We need smart human EAs, not simia Bernoulli ("Bernoulli monkey" is my term: it's a robot that makes trades at random and on average leaks a spread per trade - for a monkey!).
I want ATS to have intelligence and I want ATS to become really interesting. I remember one (2007) when the neuro advisor Better won. Never mind what happened to it afterwards. The important thing was that it was a work of thought, not dumb MACD fitting without any confidence in the outcome. And people did seriously wonder - could it be that neurocellsets are really worth it?
None of the other ATCs (perhaps excluding the "ATS pipsetters", i.e. ATC 2008) caused such a surge of optimism.
We will have to come up with mechanisms which make people think, rather than stupidly clone known ideas without risking anything.(And what's that got to do with drawing styles (see green text tooltip)?)
You cannot just say: "People, think about it, and stupid advisors will be excluded. We'll have to come up with more sophisticated rules that exclude such advisers in advance and make the championship more interesting as a result.
In short, ATC should become a purveyor of money managers to potential investors, rather than a bunch of monkeys, by hook or by crook, eager for a slice of the prize hundred thousand. This will raise the profile of both ATS itself and the MT5 platform.
I don't believe that Xupypr is capable of anything other than MACD!
P.S. I apologise for being harsh, if I went too far.In fact, the problem is much deeper than it seems, and its roots are not so much in the Championship rules but in the general concept of MT5 development. There is a great need for new sensible ideas, original algorithms and robots. But where to get them? The participants of the Championships mainly take the same hackneyed ideas, combine them and then display them in the competition. Here is an excerpt from an interview with a typical 2012 ATC participant:
Tell us about your Expert Advisor on ATC 2012? What strategy are you using and what indicators are the indicators?
My Expert Advisor Super-G uses four technical indicators for opening positions: MACD, Stochastic Oscillator, Parabolic SAR and Momentum. I also use trailing stops to protect my profits. My EA is multicurrency and works on 10 currency pairs. Initially it was working on all 12 pairs, but I had to remove two of them to keep within 30 minutes limit during autochecks. Why do I use multi-currency? Because I believe in the power of synergy. The more currencies, the better the results.
MQ are doing what they should be doing - popularising the MQL5 language, i.e. precisely the technical component. The area of ideas and concepts is sort of left out. The extremely important Trading Systems section is disappointingly empty. There are only 16 topics there compared to 1661 topics in the "General Discussions" section. And only when these sections are equal in size, we can expect new original algorithms in ATS 2012.
To achieve this, we need to develop the MQL Community in both directions: 1. Ideas and 2. The technical implementation of these ideas. While the technical development is more or less clear, the development of the Community as a leading trading site where traders from around the world could gather and share their ideas is very challenging. The main difficulties are few, but they are significant. Foremost among them are:
- The rigid integration of the platform with the data provider, which can only be a broker;
- Stockbrokers are in no hurry to introduce MT5 as an exchange terminal, seeing MT5 as the next new version of MT4. We can say that the MT5 segment is already defined - it is the MT4 segment of which it is the successor.
- The terminal has many technical features passed over from MT4 times, which were designed for FOREX specifics. Not all of these features are sufficient or adequate for exchange traders. Even externally MT5 is similar to its parent MT4. And that shows exactly the continuity.
That makes a lot of sense, which is to achieve enlightenment from putting knowledge into practice.
And the first-order enlightenment is achieved almost immediately: in practice, an ordinary trader has no access to Plaza. Exactly in practice.
So my broker is misleading me? Is my trading platform misleading me? Are the megabytes of source code running through PlazaII actually fake? !!!!
What I mean is not access via Quick with Plaza2, but independent access, without Quick. It costs 4,000 a month and is available to any trader.
- Rigid integration of the platform with the data provider, which can only be a broker;
I was voicing a suggestion, let the MC run only quotes. Not even essentially a demo is needed. Look at how direct competitors operate
It is also not their direct business to provide quotes, but they lure the client with this and popularise the platform.
They have their own special reseller plan, put markup on it and it's done.
All Russian-speaking tech analysts will throw out the metostocks on the first day and all investment companies will have MT5 as a platform for analysis.
The lazy ones will start hustling brokers to trade with this program immediately, the most stubborn will start to write their own drive to their favorite exchanges (at least Guadeloupe, if only there would be quotes).
I myself am ready to pay $300 per month subscription fee, just to see Goldman's quotes in real time.
You're just opening my eyes.
Why can't I trade through the bottom right laptop?
Because it says in the same corner:
Zerich hasn't finished a lot of what is needed in practice. But this is just marketing material. Especially persistent single traders of course can break through, but it is not even 10 or 50 traders, not to mention the mass application.
Assertion: 99% of latency is in the network, so the question about the delay in the software is out of the question
Vitaly's answer: I am an IT specialist, trading, exchange, arbitrage and generally compared to an ideal spherical horse
Vitaliy, this is the level of your reasoning. Study the basics and do not break away from the reality. You may see that the topic of pipsing is very close to you, you are very interested in discussing it and adding everything appropriate to the subject at random. But the reality is completely different, there is not much room for HFT fairy tales.
I got curious and made a trace from my server to the exchange server, amazing brakes, all in all some miserable ms, crazy ....
Tracing the path to 46.182.84.246 on TCP port 443 (https), 30 hops max
1 10.xxx.0.2 9.408 ms 0.200 ms 0.170 ms
2 core.ge00.96.br0.sh.kv (193.39.xxx.xxx) 0.675 ms 0.522 ms 0.507 ms
3 xxxxxx.xxxx.xxxx.ua (193.39.xxxx.xxxx) 0.852 ms 0.829 ms 0.870 ms
4 ex9-p11.EXT.IEV.UA.29632.as (62.205.134.77) 1.125 ms 0.825 ms 0.872 ms
5 46.182.87.13 2.243 ms 3.133 ms 2.422 ms
6 andromeda.gigatrans.ua (46.182.80.7) 1.098 ms 1.022 ms 1.049 ms
7 46-182-80-14.net.gigatrans.ua (46.182.80.14) 1.121 ms 0.936 ms 0.809 ms
8 46-182-84-246.net.gigatrans.ua (46.182.84.246) [open] 1.245 ms 1.128 ms 1.364 ms
Shall we learn the math together?
That is, the practice will not work for you.
Because it says in the same corner:
Zerich hasn't finished a lot of what is needed in practice. But this is just marketing material. Especially persistent single traders of course can break through, but it is not even 10 or 50 traders, not to mention the mass application.
So my broker is misleading me? Is my trading platform misleading me? Megabytes of source code running through PlazaII is actually a fake? !!!!
What I mean is not access via Quick with Plaza2, but independent access, without Quick. It costs 4,000 a month and is available to any trader.
It's a matter of fact, talking about a theoretical possibility. For there is a huge gulf between:
In practice, take it and start using it:
- write a program with the whole market interface
- Build a robot into it, implementing all the market environment and the entire analytical functionality in the form of indicators and visualization (could take years of work)
- Certify the resulting program
- Sign a lot of paperwork with a broker, in addition to the regular account
- Put your server as close to the exchange as possible
- only then try to benefit from the savings of network latency
It is possible to get past these 6 points, but they are only single heroes. Half of them realise at the end that it was essentially a wasted journey.Introduces in fact, speaking of a theoretical possibility. For there is a vast gulf between:
In practice, take it and start using it:
- write a program with the whole market interface
- Build a robot into it, implementing all the market environment and the entire analytical functionality in the form of indicators and visualization (could take years of work)
- Certify the resulting program
- Sign a lot of paperwork with a broker, in addition to the regular account
- Put your server as close to the exchange as possible
- only then try to benefit from the savings of network latency
It's possible to get past those 6 points, but it's only single heroes. Half of which at the end realize that the path has been passed in essence for nothing.Excuse me, where do you put your hetway in the scheme, right after the queue?
And the argument about network latency is nonsense. My server takes 12 ms to reach the server, and it's on parity, if I install it on their tech site the latency will drop to 3x.
Why do I need to mass, I'm the only one who does. But as I wrote above. HFT trading itself doesn't interest me. I want to know with what delay will get data to me in the terminal, the last network hop let's consider 1 ms (I will put my server at the technical platform broker)
That is, you turn off your brain and don't want to build a conclusion from your starting points according to the scheme:
Is it hard to conclude that no Metatrader server/any other software has any effect on the final delay?
Or are you just embarrassed to state directly"STP Metatrader server introduces a big delay and that's what I'm worried about"? And by stating that no HFT is of interest, but in fact half of your conversations are about mythical arbitrage, the shenanigans in the betting market.
Introduces in fact, speaking of a theoretical possibility. For there is a vast gulf between: