Can you suggest a good advisor? - page 9
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 have suggested this solution to this problem:
1. Buy a real account (dollar or cent, as agreed with the seller) at a broker, fund it with an amount equal to the value of the advisor and transfer the account management to the seller;
2. The seller trades for 1 year (or possibly less, if the profitability results declared are achieved), and shows the efficiency of the product;
3. At the end of the term:
a) - the seller takes back the full amount accumulated in the account, with the buyer covering the loss if the EA has worked at a loss;
b) the buyer takes back the Expert Advisor if he/she wants, or, in case of a negative result, remains with the replenished deposit and does not lose anything.
Only sellers who are confident in their EA will agree to such a scheme.
Not a fact. No one will agree, and the idea makes no sense. And what do the sellers lose in this case? They lose the buyer's deposit and nothing happens. Even if the Expert Advisor has traded on the plus side, no one wants to give away the profit, because the buyer in this case will pay with his time.
That's an interesting way of thinking.
I don't think there's any point in showing anything... There's only one reason... Everyone's heard"grail ", but not everyone knows what it is and what it looks like...
It's like a fairy tale. http://my.mail.ru/mail/marshalov_a/video/86/103.html//.
Question: "If the system has been running since 2006 and has never been optimized, what is it?"
Not a fact. No one will agree and the idea makes no sense. And what do the sellers lose in this case, the buyer's deposit is drained and nothing happens. Even if the Expert Advisor has traded on the plus side, no one wants to give away the profit, because the buyer in this case will pay with his time.
That's an interesting way of thinking.
a) - the seller takes all the money accumulated on the account, and if the advisor worked in deficit, it covers the losses of the buyer;
I have suggested this solution to this problem:
1. Buy a real account (dollar or cent, as agreed with the seller) at a broker, fund it with an amount equal to the value of the advisor and transfer the account management to the seller;
2. The seller trades for 1 year (or possibly less, if the profitability results declared are achieved), and shows the efficiency of the product;
3. At the end of the term:
a) - the seller takes back the full amount accumulated in the account, with the buyer covering the loss if the EA has worked at a loss;
b) the buyer takes back the Expert Advisor if he/she wants, or, in case of a negative result, remains with the replenished deposit and does not lose anything.
Only sellers who are confident in their EA will agree to such a scheme.
There is a normal and well-known solution:
1. the seller of any Advisor should monitor its work on a real account in the signals
2. Monitoring of the sold EA in the signals is attached to the description of the sold EA, and the seller cannot hide this monitoring even after it is defeated
At the moment, monitoring is voluntary -- make it compulsory. You want to sell an EA, monitor its performance. The Expert Advisor is lost, the seller cannot disable the display of that loss. After the loss, if you want to continue to sell the Expert Advisor, put it on the signal again.
p.s. There should be no doubt that the robot traded and the seller did not manually interfere in its work. If you do not know the difference between the two, you may get a signal from the robot. In the signals when demonstrating trades you can highlight manually the opening of a trade.
There is a normal and well-known solution:
1. the seller of any EA must monitor its performance on a real account in signals
2. Monitoring of the sold EA in the signals is attached to the description of the sold EA, and the seller cannot hide this monitoring even after it is defeated
At the moment, monitoring is voluntary -- make it compulsory. You want to sell an EA, monitor its performance. The Expert Advisor is lost, the seller cannot disable the display of that loss. After the loss, if you want to sell the Expert Advisor again, put it on the signal.
What you are suggesting all together just doesn't make sense for the meta-quotes. With monitors like that, the market can simply be shut down.
The purpose of the business is personal enrichment, not everyone who has extra quid in their pockets.
What you are suggesting all together just doesn't make sense for the meta-quotes. With monitors like that, the market can simply be shut down.
The purpose of the business is personal enrichment, not everyone who has extra quid in their pockets.
What you are suggesting all together just doesn't make sense for the meta-quotes. With that kind of monitoring, the market can simply be shut down.
The purpose of the business is personal enrichment, not for all those who have extra quid in their pockets.
What you said -- everyone knows that too.
And if the MCs do not introduce mandatory monitoring of traded EAs, that gives only one question to the question of the thread: "There are no good EAs in the market and there never were" - whether some people like it or not - but it's a fact.
But in addition to Expert Advisors, Market has Expert Advisors, indicators and scripts.
Therefore, the market has a place to exist and to develop.