How to find traders and analysts to work in the office - page 8
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
I'm just amazed at people's ability to judge for others
A man who can steadily earn money at a fund or forex office will not go to work for a percentage or a salary... The money is not enough to make a profit, but you can earn a lot more at home.
If you know how to earn and you are sure, you can rise to the required minimum amount and work at home, without bosses, without commitment and risking only your own money...
With this kind of search you will only find losers who have already lost everything and will try to win back your funds...
You have to know how much "big money" it is .....
Myth, I'll tell you how it's done. I'm sick and tired of getting calls like this.
You first try to trade on your own. Then, if you arouse the broker's or DTZ's interest, they give you any amount you want to manage. You share the profits, you reimburse the losses. The limit is in the middle of the deposit - it's time to return.
This scam has been running for at least 9 months. The only person who loses is the employee of the office.
Once again, trading requires a certain intelligence, but it is still not higher mathematics, but a reliance on common sense. That is why a bunch of sophisticated indicators is of little or no value.
Only the higher mathematics (GM) is able to beat the market, the human intellect is needed only to create a profitable strategy based on VM. The market is not a human minded activity.
You don't need any higher mathematics for forex. For forex, school mathematics is enough.
You need philosophy + psychology + school mathematics.
This is how you can beat Forex.
You don't need any higher mathematics for forex. For forex, school mathematics is enough.
You need philosophy + psychology + school mathematics.
You need philosophy + psychology + school mathematics.
You don't need any higher mathematics for forex. For forex, school mathematics is enough.
You need philosophy + psychology + school mathematics.
You need philosophy + psychology + school mathematics.
To all those who deny the need of QM in trading: Is it possible to achieve similar results by denying QM with SL=TP=300pp, TF D1, fixed lot 0.01 on EUR/Dollar from early 2009 to present time?
Bars in history 2273
3889 ticks simulated
Modeling quality n/a
Chart mismatch errors 0
Initial deposit 1000.00
Spread Current (27)
Net profit 12132.12
Total profit 27922.48
Total loss -15790.36
Profitability 1.77
Expected payoff 7.50
Absolute drawdown 113.96
Maximum drawdown 2451.97 (35.49%)
Relative drawdown 52.97% (2243.38)
Total trades 1617
Short positions (% win) 816 (63.48%)
Long positions (% win) 801 (54.43%)
Profitable trades (% of all) 954 (59.00%)
Loss trades (% of all) 663 (41.00%)
Largest
profitable trade 29.99
losing trade -31.39
Average
profitable trade 29.27
losing trade -23.82
Maximum number
consecutive wins (profit) 91 (2686.27)
Continuous losses (loss) 76 (-823.92)
Maximum
Continuous Profit (number of wins) 2686.27 (91)
Continuous loss (number of losses) -1309.25 (45)
Average
continuous winnings 18
Continuous loss 12
To all those who deny the need to use VM in trading: is it possible to achieve similar results by denying VM with SL=TP=300pp, TF D1, fixed lot 0.01 on EUR/Dollar from the beginning of 2009 to now?
.....
There is no denial on the use of VMs, there is a development path.
And the answer about the tests is the following - unfortunately it did not work. There are no stops there.
I will say it again: trading requires a certain intelligence, but it is still not higher mathematics (VM), but reliance on common sense. That is why a lot of sophisticated indicators are of little or no value.
No need to indiscriminately blame all indicators and VMs, see how my VM-based indicator is catching trends on H1 from early 2014 to the present time on Euro/Dollar at TP=400 and SL=20pp. (four digits):
There are 6925 bars in the history
Simulated ticks 12847
Modeling quality n/a
Error of chart mismatching 0
Initial deposit 1000.00
Spread Current (27)
Net profit 8391.08
Total profit 16619.49
Total loss -8228.41
Profitability 2.02
Expected payoff 1.60
Absolute drawdown 806.09
Maximum drawdown 2697.83 (51.09%)
Relative drawdown 86.48% (1452.17)
Total trades 5257
Short positions (% win) 3446 (22.75%)
Long positions (% win) 1811 (6.90%)
Profitable trades (% of all) 909 (17.29%)
Loss trades (% of all) 4348 (82.71%)
Largest
profitable trade 39.99
losing trade -3.20
Average
profitable trade 18.28
losing trade -1.89
Maximum number
continuous wins (profit) 100 (1405.31)
Continuous losses (loss) 313 (-598.32)
Maximum
Continuous Profit (number of wins) 1750.50 (44)
Continuous loss (number of losses) -598.32 (313)
Average
continuous winnings 12
Continuous loss 56
Don't indiscriminately blame all indicators, see how my indicator has been catching trends on H1 from early 2014 to date with TP=400 and SL=20pp. (four digits):