What kind of expert does an expert have to be for you to buy one? - 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
No one knows what will happen in the future, regardless of whether you have invested in a PAMM or bought an Expert Advisor. That is why we need the EA criteria under discussion - to be as confident as possible about its successful future.
By your logic, let's all buy EvilBobber from Andrei, he's a famous coder... If anything, we'll understand him and forgive him.
And if we know how the coder did his EA, there is a high probability of repeating it.
The activity on many forums often indicates that the person has nothing to do or likes to gossip.
If I'm constantly writing code and testing it, I don't have time to post on forums.
So I don't agree with you. And it's not related to the subject either.
If some programmer was sitting in his "basement" for 5 years and then suddenly appeared like "Hello, my name is ... I created a very good expert" ... so let him try to sell it ... will only succeed on the momentary interest/attraction of buyers/newbies. Many people will think that he just renamed some EA, changing something in it minimally ... Or they will think that he is one of them - like a clone, because the world of forex and the world of forex coders is small - many know each other virtually.
Although, of course, you may be right - after all, some English-speaking Expert Advisors are sold anonymously on their sites (quite anonymously) ... and buy from them ...
I know a real case where one well-known coder (ours) almost bought his own indicator on an English site (renamed and slightly changed).
============
You asked - I just replied.
Well, if you are a programmer-trader, it will be easier for you to formulate the necessary parameters for an EA.
Yes, the possibility of increasing/reducing the risk should be a must.I am interested in:
1. Stable balance lines and equity upwards in the tester over the last few years. (Preferably within 10 years).
5. Ability to trade both by market and by pending orders without significant loss of profitability.
6. High Recovery Factor, low drawdown. (Up to 15%).
Monitoring minimum of 3 months
The first sentence contradicts the second: if no one knows, discussion will not change anything. Confidence in a strategy does not depend on the results of its testing, but on the degree of thoroughness of the strategy idea itself. In this case, testing is only required to verify the correctness of the programme, not the results of the strategy.
It is not a contradiction, it is called risk.
You are absolutely right about the thoroughness of the strategy idea itself. It is probably foolish to trust an EA with super profits on martin or fill-ups. But if the EA will work on the principles of "buy low - sell high", "cut the losses and let the profits grow", and if the stop loss is several times lower than the take - then it's not so scary))
I am interested in:
1. Stable balance lines and equity upwards in the tester over the last few years. (10 years preferably).
5. Ability to trade both by market and by pending orders without significant loss of profitability.
6. High Recovery Factor, low drawdown. (Up to 15%).
11. Monitoring minimum of 3 months.
1, 5 is not a problem, although it is difficult to find a normal history until 2009, for example for XAUUSD under MT5.
6. How high is the Recovery Factor? The drawdown is desirable up to 10%.
Monitoring is necessary! What service would be preferable?
I am interested in:
1. Stable balance lines and equity upwards in the tester over the last few years. (10 years preferably).
5. Ability to trade both by market and by pending orders without significant loss of profitability.
6. High Recovery Factor, low drawdown. (Up to 15%)
Monitoring minimum of 3 months
The topic moves seamlessly into the realm of folk tale folklore, irrepressible fantasy and over-the-top daydreaming!
The dead-end branch is complete experts, friends. No expert has a right hemisphere responsible for imagery and other non-mathematical things. It cannot be programmed. You have to be able to choose. There are several trading signals. One of them is true. The rest are trash. The task of the head is to choose the right signal out of these several ones. I could not formalize it as much as I have tried. Only eye and intuition! Now, after 12 years of trading, thanks to 10 years of cooperation with Komposter I make 25% of my balance per month. I don't trade publicly. My balance is not unusually large. Investors forbid me to add other people's money. I am comfortable with the standard trading rules of 2% risk per position.
I am convinced that if a trading system can be described in words and laid out on paper, it can (and should!) be programmed and tested on history. If only to make sure that it does not lose money.
And the semi-automatic is a slippery, subjective thing. After all, you can not pass (sell) your intuition to someone else ...
I myself have been trading for many years on the eye+intuition system, sometimes very successfully, until the third factor appears - psychology. This is where we need a tool that would level out this third factor.