"The 'perfect' trading system - page 122

 
VictorArt: No trading system has ever been created that lasts indefinitely in the history of the financial markets.

I agree. Nothing lasts forever. Only you do not take into account one "but" - the trading system must be timely optimized, improved and modified according to changes in the conditions of that very same financial market. But it depends on the trader's skill, not on the robot designer, some smart guys and "eternal" Expert Advisors. ))))
 

Shit!

There's nothing to discuss!

Bullshit...

===

Of course, I could tell you why it's nonsense. But only those who already know it would understand...

And those who buy it, they can't be helped.

 
LeoV:

Agreed. Are the deals opening? - They open! Then they close? - they close! no profit? - no profit. Everything works reliably? - reliable! stable? - stable! )))

Well, you see, Leonid - you are beginning to understand something in my PAMM-project - it seems that even 1.5 years has not passed since you started asking me questions, and I am answering them :)
 
VictorArt: Well, you see, Leonid - you are already beginning to understand something in my PAMM-project - it seems that not even 1.5 years have passed, as you have started to ask me questions here, and I am answering them :)

Only there is no buzz in it, except the buzz of self-satisfaction, that everything works like clockwork. I haven't done that for a long time. What's the buzz? )))
 
paukas:

Victor, you still don't get it, do you?

40000% is in the tester. It was shown to you so that you would not brag about the tester's results. And do not make idiots out of investors.


Vladimir, you still don't get it, do you?

I didn't "brag" about the test results, but simply checked whether the adaptive EA worked or not.

It turned out that it did.

This is a developer forum and I believe that if there is a positive result, it may be of interest to some of the developers, otherwise why is there a code base here at all?

But you, as usual, judge me by myself violating a popular wisdom: "don't judge a man by himself".

 
LeoV:

Only there's no buzz about it, except the buzz of self-satisfaction that everything works like clockwork. That's something I haven't done in a long time. What's the buzz? )))

When there's profit to be made, that's when it'll be a buzz.
 
VictorArt: When the profits come in, that's when you'll get your kicks.

Well, you're a smart man, you must understand. You don't go from -90%. You have to make 900% profit to get to zero. That's impossible.
 
VictorArt:

When the profits come in, you'll get a buzz.

When the profits come, you'll make a PR campaign, because before you there were so many of them, talking about the future as if it had already happened, you are incorrigible, you probably always stick your nose in someone else's monastery, this thread was not created by you and is for another topic, leave it alone.
 
LeoV:

Agreed. Nothing is eternal. But you do not take into account one "but" - a trading system must be timely optimized, improved and changed depending on changing conditions of the financial market. But it depends on the trader's skill, not on the robot designer, some smart guys and "eternal" Expert Advisors. ))))


Dumb question, as from the dumbest person on this forum: how will you guarantee the result of changes/improvements?

"Trader's skill"?

How will you measure mastery? By the number of clairvoyants in the previous generations? :)

Not so long ago, there was one recognized "master", who lost everything at one stroke. There's another master who blew 0.5 million. "But everything is not so bad in another PAMM.

And there is another one, who has 25 lots without stops and 10 points of profit per trade, but all with multi-level protection.

P.S.: All coincidences with real projects are purely coincidental and are only fictional situations that could potentially arise someday :)

 
LeoV:

Well, you're a smart man, you must understand. You don't go from -90%. You have to make 900% profit to get to zero. That's impossible.

De ja vu. That's more or less what you said when it was -60%.