On-line trading advisor. Exchange of views - page 11
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
The code is not mine. Only my ideas. Ordered it from a programmer about a year and a half ago.
Sorry, but it came up again for some reason: "Moped not mine. I just posted the ad..." )
Frankly speaking, I lost confidence in the strategy tester a long time ago. When in February 2010 he showed me the possibility of a 300-fold growth of balance in one month. But online trading - it's closer to the truth - 15-30% a month :) without any pretensions to supergraphic.
Here's another thought. In light of the fact that we are trading with pauses, why is there such a difference in results - as much as a thousandfold? )
You say that the execution time for this TS is insignificant. What else may cause such differences? It's essentially a simple grid, though it is adaptable to history.
Unscrewed studs? So do not test it on the demo, but on real quotes, there they are not.
Sorry, but once again for some reason, "The moped isn't mine. I only posted the ad..." )
Here's another thought. In light of the fact that we are trading with pauses, why is there such a difference in results - as much as a thousandfold? )
You say that the execution time for this TS is insignificant. What else may cause such differences? It's essentially a simple grid, though it is adaptable to history.
Unscrewed studs? So test it not on the demo but on real quotes, there are none.
The results are the same on the real world: around 30%. You can cover more currency pairs on the demo.
Well, if you do not want to tell me where the 30000% number came from, of course, that is your right.
One more point. Instead of opening several accounts (and with different brokers), it makes much more sense to use one account, but with a reliable broker. And EAs for different pairs can also be installed on separate terminals (but on one account).
The simple difference is that there is no need to register many accounts, and even more for different people, which in general does not reduce non-trading risks, but only increases them.
More. You write on the website that "working in the tester almost brought you to a dead end". However, this is the reason why there are great doubts about the sustainability of your strategy. Since some mythical "internal self-testing" may be nothing more than self-deception.
I don't trust the tester either. However, if an expert does not stand up to at least a rough test in a tester, I personally would not rely on the test data on a forward, even over a year. For they can be very static, i.e. depend on the coincidence of external factors. In the tester, they are cut off, and all that is left is the backbone of quotes and nothing else. Yes, there can be gaps and inconsistencies in history, but nevertheless with some analysis and diligence they can be easily found, and the results obtained due to them will be excluded from the general picture.
All the more so, a grid based on purely mathematical models simply has to undergo testing. Otherwise, it is possible to remain in illusions about its effectiveness for years. And at the next unaccounted "force majeure", again and again "stalemate", waiting for months to the next similar case. A very irrational testing model you have chosen, that is my opinion.
One more point. Instead of opening several accounts (and with different brokers), it makes much more sense to use one account, but with a reliable broker. And advisors for different pairs can also be installed on separate terminals (but on one account).
The simple difference is that there is no need to register many accounts, and even more for different people, which in general does not reduce non-trading risks, but only increases them.