For those who are convinced that all EAs with a martin are losing out. - page 7

New comment
 
khorosh:

1. Yes I did, that's why I thought it didn't make sense to repeat myself on page 1 or 10.

2. I am revising my approaches, but my EAs always have martin.

I will not show them. 3. One of my EAs has been working since last year, but I traded manually on the same account, and I do not like to post reports from real account.

4. 4. If you have read carefully, it was clearly enough said " .I brought the test results simply as a proof that EAs with a Martin may work without losing money on the entire quote history". I did not want anything for myself, I just decided to post the information to expand my knowledge about EAs capabilities with martin. I thought it would be interesting for those who deal with this subject. I thought that those who arealready gurus and have less risky strategies in their portfolios would understandably perceive my information asfacepalm.

By the way (on the topic of the thread), could you show me the results with the same parameters and on the same test period, but without using martin. Interesting for comparison.
 
tol64:
By the way (on the topic of the thread), could you show the result with the same parameters and on the same test period, but without using a martin. Interesting for comparison.

Do you want the lot to not increase in a series, or do you want it to be a single open position rather than a series?
 
khorosh:
Do you want the lot to not increase in a series, or do you want it to be a single open position rather than a series?

That is, the same series of all trades, but with a fixed lot. If there is an increase of position volume, then of course, we should leave it there too to make a correct comparison. Simply exclude the increase in volume in order to win back the previous/previous losses.
 
tol64:
That is, the same series of all trades, only with a fixed lot. If there is an increase in the volume of the position, then of course it should be left as well, so that there is a correct comparison. Simply exclude the increase in volume in order to win back the previous/previous losses.

Understood. I'll do it later. I think it's going to be a drain, although who knows, we'll have to see.
 
khorosh:

Can you hope that this instance of EA with a martin will work without losing for a few years? .....


I've read the whole thread, but I still don't understand the purpose for which you started it.

If you firmly believe you know how to manage a martin, and you don't think you are Giordano Bruno,

If you know how to run a martin, there is no need to prove to anyone here that it is the Earth that revolves around the Sun and not the other way around.

 
DhP:

I've read the whole thread, but I still don't understand the purpose for which you started it.




So you didn't read it carefully.
 
khorosh:
Then you haven't read it carefully.

Did you want to get support here? )))
 
DhP:
Did you want to enlist support here? )))

Read the last answer to maths p.4.
 
khorosh:
Got it. I will do it later. I think there will be a plum, although who knows, we'll have to see.

Try it and show the results, I wonder what you will get too. Also try to optimise the parameters without martin over the whole test period. This result should also be considered separately. And then apply Martin to this result.

This will bring you to four results for analysis:

1. The one at the beginning of the branch.

2. the same result but without Martin.

3. The optimized one without Martin.

4. The optimized one without Martin, but with Martin turned on.

If everything is long or there is no desire, at least show the second one and that's enough. ))

 
khorosh:
Read the last answer to maths point 4.

Read my first post.
1234567891011121314...53
New comment