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 can only say that I have not closed one year without a loss since 2006, taking into account the fact that the last optimization of the EA was done in 2006.
No lot doubling, no martin, no trawls or any other modifications ... I mean probably the EA still has potential ... Yes, and I can also add that I do not have the only one .
Looks like we're finally getting down to business.
The statistics are really good. I'm only confused by the maximum loss trade of 135, with an average loss of 38 and an average gain of 41. Also confused by the 37% drawdown. Looks like the algorithm doesn't use a stop loss.
It would also be very interesting to look at the average and maximum recovery time after a drawdown. Well, roughly speaking, how long on average the robot has been in the red. If it's a few months - that's great, if it's a few years - it's almost impossible to sell it to investors.
50/50 is a strong regularity). The advisor works on closing unsuccessful trades in a timely manner and apparently accompanying successful ones. And I wouldn't say it's wrong.
I disagree. The average profitable trade is not much bigger than the average losing trade. That is, the robot takes about the same distance both in plus and in minus. It wins due to the fact that there are more profitable trades.
Well, maybe due to a small prevalence of the average profit trade size.
I think it makes sense to use an EA if the losing period does not exceed 1 month, otherwise it is better to trade manually. If in real trading the Expert Advisor is losing for a month, it needs to be repaired or replaced.
I disagree. The average profitable trade is not much bigger than the average losing trade. That is, the robot takes about the same distance both in plus and in minus. It wins due to the fact that there are more profitable trades.
And maybe due to a small advantage of the average profit trade size.
Why one month? Not two or three? Does it somehow depend on the working timeframe?
You just need to understand I think that with a high percentage of profitable trades you won't live long. There is no balance and it indicates a short-term sharpening, i.e. adjustment.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Should the percentage of profitable trades decrease? And from what fact in the statistics do you see that there is no balance? I believe that the presence or absence of fitting can be judged only by the difference in results for the period, in which the EA has been optimized, and the control period. Explain your point.
Why one month? Not two or three? Does it somehow depend on the working timeframe?