Why sell profitable EAs! - page 10
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
azfaraon, it's hard for me to explain anything here, frankly. Much easier to test on lot 1 than to count all three drawdowns. But timbo's suspicion, generally speaking, is not far from the truth. Let's take the 3 figures from the report:
Absolute drawdown based on the number 281.10, I can not say anything informative, because I do not know what balance it was obtained (by the way, the developers could have put a figure in absolute drawdown and percent, so that it could be calculated from which balance it happened).
Relative drawdown: it happened to the balance 372.65/3.69% = 10099, i.e. almost at the initial one. This balance corresponds to 99 quid total profit of the account. Lot 1 simply stupidly increases all the results of transactions by 10 times compared to 0.1. Consequently, the balance of lot 1 would be 10000 + 99*10 = 10990, and the drawdown would be equal to 372.65*10 = 3726.5. Divided by one: 3726.5/10990 = 33.9%. This is the relative drawdown exactly at this point in the test, but it is not necessarily the maximum!
In fact, by the way, this figure gives the minimum estimate of the absolute drawdown: the balance would have fallen by 10,090-3726.5=10000-2736.5 in relation to lot 1, i.e. the absolute one will not be less than this figure.
Maximum: happened at the balance of 443.45/1.60% = 27716, i.e. closer to the end of the testing period. The balance at lot 1 would be equal to 10000+(27716-10000)*10 = 187160. This drawdown would be equal to 443.45*10 = 4434.5, and it is not too large in comparison with the balance reached, 2.37%.
Yes, the relative drawdown is increasing, but it is at the very beginning. If it were anywhere near the end, it would be worse.
All these explanations are only for 1.0 constant lot. I'm not even talking about geometric MM (lot proportional to balance), things are worse there. Here too, it's better not to calculate, but just to test.
Have no illusions, DTs will not give you much money, this also applies to the management option.
in response, I'll just show you the real account of Alexander BETTER
http://www.viac.ru/cd/23&list=open&acc=2102
the real account of MTC which took 1st place at the championship
modestly so it works 200% half a year not 1300% in 3 months...
try telling a western investor that they will get 200% in half a year...
Your example only confirms my words. When you sell it, Alexander's BETTER program will cost you at least 10,000. Why wait for the whole year to earn this amount of money by trading, if you can earn it in one day from the first copy sold? If you sell the software itself, it won't take Alexandra BETTER a year to become a millionaire, provided you sell it selectively into the "good hands" of major foundations, banks and retail outlets, to reduce the risk of a copy appearing in a week on all those markets selling pirated discs for 100 hryvnias. And if you trade yourself to get the same profits as from the sales of the program, you need to have a deposit of 3000000, not 3000, and then it will be clear "how excited will be the DCs" from your presence, and whether, without hassle, will withdraw profits earned a year later. And any normal brokerage company will have no problem withdrawing 3000 inside itself even without entering the interbank market. In this example I am showing only the comparability of this and other approaches to this problem. There are some rare exceptions, like Sores, but because of their rarity you cannot take them into account. Besides, to become such an exception you need: first, have a large initial capital; second, have your own brokerage company; third, at the right time be able to see and react on crisis situation on the market; fourth, be prepared that if after all this you will be able to survive, you will not get visa to some countries. Money does not appear out of thin air, it simply flows from one pocket to another. The Sores scam led to the bankruptcy of one of the biggest banks in England, with all the consequences. Apart from Sores, there were others who also pulled off similar scams, only we never heard of them, before we even got what was theirs, they were trampled into the dirt. In this business the rule is quite true: "In war, like in war," and there is no virtual bloodshed, but quite concrete.
I express only my understanding of the problem, born on the basis of my own experience both in business and in studying the Forex market.
Maximum: happened at balance 443.45/1.60% = 27716, i.e. close to the end of the testing period. The balance at lot 1 would be equal to 10000+(27716-10000)*10 = 187160. This drawdown would be equal to 443.45*10 = 4434.5, and it is not too big in comparison with the balance reached, 2.37%.
Yes, timbo, but I didn't talk about that. That's a whole other conversation. I tried to simply extrapolate from what is in the report without asking such questions.
Have no illusions, you won't make much money with DCs, this also applies to the management option.
I'll just show you Alexander BETTER's real account in return
http://www.viac.ru/cd/23&list=open&acc=2102
the real account is running MTC which took 1st place at the championship
modestly running at 200% for half a year not 1300% in 3 months...
try telling a western investor that he will get 200% in half a year...
Your example only confirms my words. When sold, Alexander's BETTER program will be worth at least 10000. Why wait for a whole year to earn that much money by trading, if you can earn it in just one day from the first copy sold? If you sell the software itself, it won't take Alexandra BETTER a year to become a millionaire, provided you sell it selectively into the "good hands" of major foundations, banks and retail outlets, to reduce the risk of a copy appearing in a week on all the pirated discs trading for 100 hryvnias. And if you trade yourself to get the same profits as from the sales of the program, you need to have a deposit of 3000000, not 3000, and then it will be clear "how excited will be the DCs" from your presence, and whether, without hassle, will withdraw profits earned a year later. And any normal brokerage company will have no problem withdrawing 3000 inside itself even without entering the interbank market. In this example I am showing only the comparability of this and other approaches to this problem. There are some rare exceptions, like Sores, but because of their rarity you cannot take them into account. Besides, to become such an exception you need: first, have a large initial capital; second, have your own brokerage company; third, at the right time be able to see and react to the crisis situation on the market; fourth, be prepared that if after all this you will be able to survive, you will not get a visa to some countries. Money does not appear out of thin air, it simply flows from one pocket to another. The Sores scam led to the bankruptcy of one of the biggest banks in England, with all the consequences. Apart from Sores, there were others who also pulled off similar scams, only we never heard of them, before we even got what was theirs, they were trampled into the dirt. In this business the rule is quite true: "In war, like in war," and there is no virtual bloodshed, but quite concrete.
I express only my understanding of the problem, born on the basis of my own experience both in business and in the study of the Forex market.
The topic is WHY SELL a profitable Expert Advisor!
I think it is difficult to sell a system like the one created by Alexander for various reasons
1-It requires copyright control and supervision - not every cool "BUYER" who gave 10k - 100k for such a program will be able to
Competently operate it, namely, to conduct training of the neural network to make adjustments to the algorithm - that is provided that the author sells the source code
2-I wrote that instead of 10 sales by 10k from 10 investors by 10k, we receive 100k if 50% a month for the trader 50% for the investor, we obtain an approximate profit figure
3 - The author will not sell a profitable tool
Remember how the famous masters hid their recipes
gourmets didn't reveal their recipes
artists do not publish technologies to create colors
craftsmen will not tell their competitor their technology
---------
selling a profitable Expert Advisor is perfectly acceptable
1-Return on your work instantly
still consider selling SOFTWARE that facilitates manual labor
trawl indicators semi-automatic
I have practiced such a trade
there are criteria that I have worked out
I customize the program
telling her
1-indicator must reach the value X1 Y
2-indicator should show X2 value
3-indicator must show X3
4-DIRECTED Pair should break through the level
and rest easy
the system enters!
---
these systems are usually written to order and can also be sold
The profits from selling EAs, as mentioned above, are greater than those from using them, and are often required just to open an initial deposit. But it is only selling EAs that is getting harder and harder. Take this forum for example. So far I haven't encountered anything but criticism.
But it's just that it's getting harder and harder to sell EAs. Take this forum for example. So far I haven't encountered anything but criticism.
This is logical - there are too many skilled developers who can write EAs no worse than those they sell.)
I agree about the criticism. I've been stomped on here and the system still works, so let them stomp the hell out of it.