An arbitration grail is found - page 2
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 sorry - what nonsense. Everything needs testing. And certainly not the "mathematical regularity" claim.
Why especially? Do you need to test that 2+2=5?
думаю что гений кретином быть не может.
)))
Finished yesterday, and today is already such a statement of fact. Gentlemen, don't you know that the real grail does not need tests. It's all mathematically calculated.
Good afternoon. There is a certain arbitrage . Main characteristics.
The probability that the trade will be profitable 72 percent
The maximum possible profit / maximum possible loss in 1 transaction 6.5
The test as you understand I can not put anywhere testerovat, all explained strictly mathematical so that the test on the history is not necessary.
They have the same Lockirovacj grail, unfortunately these transactions are banned but they may divide the position into different brokerage companies and the profit decreases but the drawdown remains the same less than 1 per cent. All the same strictly mathematical all doubts will fall away with clarification.
Who is interested write here or
ICQ 952 614
The first consequence of the law in my name: the inventors of super-duper systems are fools and losers. That's why they can never make a deposit.
1. arbitrage means the probability that the trade is profitable 100%. Everything. That's the definition. If there is even half a percent probability of loss, it is not arbitrage. But those who have not studied anything do not know this, they like a beautiful word.
2) Any system is easily tested on history in Matlab or Excel, but dullards do not know this.
Another empty topic. They're making a ruse with vague innuendo. Only random people will fall for it.
Such suggestions do not pass muster on this forum.
I think I know what the author is talking about, I also found such a grail in my time :) On currencies with a correlation close to 1. Also purely mathematical. I had a hard time with it when I stole the MV Expert Advisor and had to rework it for my own system :( I have always remembered: "Experiment is the best critic of theory".
The most annoying thing is that there will now be another 5-6 pages of nothing here :-(
What does it mean: ... just finished testing yesterday...?
Were there any results on real or demo? If there were results, what kind of results and for what period - how many seconds-minutes-hour-days-weeks-months were tested?
Or only the mathematical algorithm was tested purely by guessing?
Purely speculative, I understand your doubts, but knowing the algorithm there would be no doubts. This is a fundamentally different TS. Do you need to check that gravity pulls the ball downwards and not upwards?
)))
Finished it yesterday and today it's already such a statement of fact. Gentlemen, don't you know that the real grail doesn't need tests. It's all mathematically calculated.
Gentlemen
The first corollary to the law in my name: the inventors of super-duper systems are fools and losers. That's why they can never make a deposit.
1. arbitrage means that the probability of a trade being profitable is 100%. Everything. That's the definition. If there is even half a percent probability of loss, it is not arbitrage. But the one who has not studied anything does not know this, he likes a beautiful word.
Any system can be easily tested on history in Matlab or Excel, but dullards do not know this.
0. There is no money for a deposit.
1. I agree it's not really arbitrage.
2. Matlab test can be done.
I think I know what the author is talking about, I also found such a grail in my time :) On currencies with a correlation close to 1. Also purely mathematical. I had a hard time with it when I stole the MV Expert Advisor and had to rework it for my own system :( I have always remembered: "Experiment is the best critic of theory".
No tools with close to one correlation are not used.