28 !!! currency pairs, 1 expert. Another grail, but this one I think no one has ever shown. + DEMO ACCOUNT - page 6
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
Absolutely no, it doesn't seem to be.
Killing the dream at the grail...
If the tester generates ticks from the quotes history with bid == Close of all timeframes, which is logical. But if the indicators use High or Low or all of them together, and the Expert Advisor trades taking them into account, then we have a clear peek into the future. The code above proves this. As long as this fact exists the money will appear all over the Internet.
Fix it!
High and Low of higher TF are used in the Expert Advisor. I will try to bypass them, and if I succeed, I will report the results.
And finally I decided to use MM with initial deposit of $1000 and lot limitation <100. It's a little boyish, of course, but pleasant.
Killing the dream at the grail...
If the tester has generated ticks from the quotes history with bid == Close of all timeframes, which is logical. But if the indicators use High or Low or all of them together, and the Expert Advisor trades taking them into account, then we have a clear peek into the future. The code above proves this. As long as this fact exists the money will appear all over the Internet.
Fix it!
High and Low of higher TF are used in the Expert Advisor. I will try to bypass them, and if I succeed, I will report the results.
And finally I decided to use MM with initial deposit of $1000 and lot limitation <100. It's a little boyish, of course, but pleasant.
What's nice about it? The fact that you have spent time and finally got "rubbish" in an attractive package. If you spent time on a really working expert and achieved a similar result, then congratulate you, but it's all games. In fact, the developers should take care that we do not get such results.
Now it turns out that even if you wrote a normal Expert Advisor, you are not so sure about the tester. And you can show a lot of things, both pictures and states.
Granit77, try to test the same Expert Advisor on the timeframe from which you get High and Low, I think you will be surprised.
2. After the latest revisions of the tester, looking into the future is in principle impossible, at least according to the developers, and no one has proven otherwise yet. The only solution is to integrate the history model into the Expert Advisor itself.
Only here it's just looking into the "future"...
2 HIDDEN
As far as I understand, the test you propose, using a slightly modified Rosh EA, is not quite correct. High of senior period really doesn't have to be equal to Bid of current cf all the time.
To show that the tester has a possibility to look into the future, it is enough to show that at the beginning of a candle of the older period its High is bigger, and Low is smaller, than High(Low) of this older period, but calculated from the current t/f. And this means the following.
Suppose the upper t/f is H1, and the current is M1. At every new hour the Expert Advisor should adjust values of variables H1High and H1Low to the value of the Open first minute of the hour. High and Low for H1 are formed in these variables manually and tickically. Then they, again, are compared to the data obtained from t/f H1 and, if equality is not reached, this gives the opportunity to look into the future.
Such a test would not only prove the possibility of using future data, but would also show when and how it occurs. Personally, I believe that High and Low of the higher t/f immediately take on their values when moving to a new candle on that higher t/f. That is, the developers don't provide for this situation at all. But maybe I am mistaken and the difference with values of the current time occurs somewhere in the middle of the candle's lifetime as a result of a programming glitch. In this case the developers will find this result very useful.
Of course, I could do all this myself, but I don't think it is necessary due to the position I've already expressed. I absolutely cannot agree with your statement here.
IMHO - We are the ones who should care about not getting stupid or harmful results. Instead, they should spend time and effort to block our (!) negative opportunities. Why? Don't take advantage of it and that's it. If the coder doesn't understand what he writes, maybe he should take care of himself instead of blaming the developers?
2 conys
And that EA you have demonstrated in another thread? I repeated your report on it on the previous page. Does it still stick to the sky ? :-)
PS By the way conys could have posted a cooler picture. For example this one.
But he was too embarrassed to admit that it was a "peek into the future".
2 HIDDEN
I could, of course, do all this myself, but because of the position I've already expressed I don't think it's necessary. I cannot agree with this statement of yours at all.
IMHO - We are the ones who should care about not getting stupid or harmful results. Instead, they should spend time and effort to block our (!) negative opportunities. Why? Don't take advantage of it and that's it. If the coder doesn't understand what he writes, maybe he should take care of himself instead of blaming developers.
Yurixx, how many programmers are on this site (many) and how many of them are good programmers (few). So it turns out that the company that develops the terminal should not make a normal and odekvatny tester for most. Or you are a fan of singing deframbs, I can not write ruder, so as not to offend you.
My opinion is that all timeframes of one currency pair in the tester should develop the same way we did before.
It turns out that Close is the same as Close in the tester, but High and Low have been overlooked, they are used as they are in the history of quotes.
It is unclear to me why the developers are silent. At least they would take into account the problem and whether it will be corrected in the 208 build.