An interesting game - who can understand from transaction history how an advisor works - page 26
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
In this case, it's better to replace the obscure drawing from the tester with the one from the real market, preferably with the straight. It's just that people might have associations with the person from the most popular branch))
:)
Associations may arise even if I put out a vein.
In general, by working inside the channel, you also exploit the idea of flatness.
P.S.
In contrast to _the_man_of_the_most_popular_branch_, I do not offer to buy anything from me.
And nothing written for MT I do not sell.
And I'm not selling "signals".
And I don't sell analytics.
That's true, but the EA is now on a cent account (I don't race anything on demo), but not this veria, which is from the test (it's for 2 months on minutes), but the previous one.
But I didn't post the figure for the gelding, it seems to me that FX is rather flat than trending, this very idea is exploited by the Expert Advisor. It has 2 adjustable parameters at the moment but a 3rd will be added soon.
I would say more precisely that it is not a market. Such a market only scares the investors.
I would say more accurately that it is not a market. It is a market that only scares investors.
I've said that before, too. Right here.
There is one big difference between our pictures - yours is from the tester and mine is from the demo.
Yes, if you took the posting of the picture as a "hit and run" etc. I apologise, I didn't mean to.
According to Safonov, negative trades are an unavoidable reality in normal space. In extra space, the trader uses the inertia of random numbers to ride the arcsinus function over short distances.
According to Safonov it is never known in which stage of inertia we are now in and when it will end.
Besides, extra space, no matter its dimensionality, is a derivative of ordinary space. And all "movements" in extra space are derived from ordinary space. A negative transaction - the efficiency curve downwards, a positive one - upwards. Or smaller atoms are used to construct the derivative space than the results of the transaction. (The stats show non SL/TP orders closed, which might suggest that.)
According to Safonov - you never know what stage of inertia you are in now, and when it will end. (1)
In addition, extra space, whatever dimensionality it may be, is a derivative of ordinary space. And all "motions" in extra space derive (2) from ordinary space. A negative transaction is a downward efficiency curve, a positive one is an upward efficiency curve. Or smaller atoms are used to construct the derivative space than the results of the deal. (The stats show non SL/TP orders closed, which might suggest that.) (3)
I can't seem to get the hang of it. I'll put the numbers.
1. inertia is comparable to the concept of guarantee under certain assumptions. These assumptions are insignificant (corrections). Even though the random variable has no memory.
2. Derivative, as you yourself put it. Neural network signals are derived from the feature space too, there is a great difference between these spaces.
3 And this question is, I believe, worthy of an answer from the author of the system. Dear sanctus, please comment.
IlyaA писал(а) >>
3 And this question is, I believe, worthy of an answer from the author of the system. The respected sanctus is invited to comment.
No, nothing finer is used.
I added a breakout system, now there should be more trades.
ok
So far so good!
Pips inputs are perfect on euros and audi, but chif is up and down!
--
This entry is really bad.
I'm predicting a sucker.
--
The question is this
if we run these sections in the strategy tester
will the inputs be the same?