"The 'perfect' trading system - page 112
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
You must not have read the thread on the PAMM-project - I spoke there several times about the project's advisers. When the project started, I knew nothing at all about trading in the financial markets.
A little later, I found it frankly ridiculous to read sermons of many "forum gurus", so it is desirable to use fewer terms such as "nonsense" - maybe not to waste your and my time.
Forget about "bullshit", sorry, I picked up some forum terms, i did not mean to offend.
As for the objectivity of tests in MT4 and in general about the adaptive robot - I see it subjectively, but all I see is that you
- You were busy getting a patent, probably subjectively again: to prove your pioneering work to yourself and to others, but alas, it seems that everything is the same in our "soviet heads" - you need to believe the paper, regardless of what the document says;
- I do not know, and cannot even guess how and for what purpose you are using the tester - to get a pretty picture or to check the strategy;
- I don't know and can't even guess what purpose you use the tester for - to put a nice picture or to check the strategy; about project consultants : it is hard to say how it was and how everyone managed to do his part of the project, I want to believe, that at least the project consultants were traders (and traders with positive results and long trading experience), rather than lecturers of the Forex-education;
ZS: thank you, I know what you think - do not be distracted by my posts anymore.
I apologize for the "bullshit", I have picked up some forum terms, I did not mean to offend.
I don't want to get the idea of objective tests in MT4 and in general about the adaptive robot - maybe it's subjective, but all I see is that you
- You were busy getting a patent, probably subjectively again: to prove your pioneering work to yourself and to others, but alas, it seems that everything is the same in our "soviet heads" - you need to believe the paper, regardless of what the document says;
- I do not know, and cannot even guess how and for what purpose you are using the tester - to get a pretty picture or to check the strategy;
- I don't know and can't even guess what purpose you use the tester for - to put a nice picture or to check the strategy; about project consultants: it is difficult to say how it was and how everyone managed to do his part of the project, I want to believe, that at least the project consultants were traders (and traders with a positive result and long trading experience), rather than lecturers of forex courses;
SZS: thank you, I know your opinion - do not get distracted by my posts anymore.
- I don't know what the "paper" has to do with it, when there is a source code and tests? If there is interest - take it and study. If there is no interest, you study it.
- I saw an update in the thread - started the tester - posted the result. I understand that it looks like a "perpetual motion machine", but what does this have to do with me? All questions to the MT4 tester developers :) Maybe the tester is lying, maybe it really isa"grail". See point 1 about "interest".
- not teachers :)
- not teachers :)
Well, if it wasn't the instructors who consulted your project, then why didn't they explain that your robot does not have a trading strategy? and in fact - it is tossing between its losing trades and profitable ones! or the instructor consultant was Bill Williams with his trading chaos?
So they say :)
As I noted above, it's obvious that the adaptive EA code is too small to:
1. to have a trading strategy - from whichever side you look at, you can't see anything
2. be able to adapt
3. be able to trade
Therefore, it cannot earn anything by definition.
As required to prove it :)
P.S.: I have not read Williams, with or without chaos. However I haven't read any alternatives, possibly your authorities as well, that's why in your understanding I cannot fall into any category - neither positive ("general authorities"), nor negative ("with my trading chaos").
That's horrible! Do you want to see a test with 40,000% p.a.?
WANTED
WANTED
There's actually a lot more out there, but on the micro lot the maximum is limited :)))
Bars in history 1038302
Modelled ticks 2056003Modeling quality n/a
Chart mismatch errors 0
Initial deposit 50.00
Net profit 160557.82
Total profit 355136.14
Total loss -194578.32
Profitability 1.83
Expected payoff 211.82
Absolute drawdown 7.60
Maximum drawdown 10050.00 (43.88%)
Relative drawdown 67.77% (207.70)
Total trades 758
Short positions (% win) 372 (52.69%)
Long positions (% win) 386 (51.55%)
Profitable trades (% of all) 395 (52.11%)
Loss trades (% of all) 363 (47.89%)
Largest
profitable trade 3000.00
Loss trade -758.50
Average
profitable deal 899.08
losing trade -536.03
Maximum number
continuous wins (profit) 8 (4750.00)
Continuous Losses (Loss) 9 (-108.00)
Maximum
Continuous Profit (number of wins) 12246.00 (5)
Continuous loss (number of losses) -6000.00 (8)
Average
continuous winnings 2
continuous loss 2
Information on the number of parameters is more important than the balance crybaby.
Information on the number of parameters is more important than the balance crybaby.
The information on the number of parameters is more important than the balance curve.
What is more important is that you can show ANY result in the test with certain skills.
And 99% of the time it will have nothing to do with future results.