For those who are convinced that all EAs with a martin are losing out. - page 31
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
I'm still in doubts, what is better: - to make a more stable variant working on a long history with rare plummets and moderate profits or less stable, but more aggressive and more profitable.
At the moment I have decided for myself that the first variant is better for me... but without plummets!
at the moment... :-)
I don't rule out the second option coming up for development soon either...
..
And in general. I'll go up to 10 times and then we'll chat. Because I will deflate tomorrow :) and we are engaged in pure chatter :)
Then good luck, like Sancho Pancho (kesha) in the post above and no plums. ))
And why can't the second one be stuffed into a bot? What are the problems at the analysis stage? At least one example to try to experiment at your leisure.
Yuri, imho the criterion is doubling the depot.
Doubling over what period of time?
Doubling for how long?
In the shortest possible time. You can work in a high-risk way if you double your deposit in a reasonably short period of time, take what is yours and keep the EA running.
If stability is more to your liking, then martingale is clearly not your path... And neither is forex.
In the shortest possible time. You can work in a high-risk way if you double your deposit in a reasonably short period of time, take what is yours and keep the EA running.
If stability is more to your liking, then martingale is clearly not your path... (Neither is forex.
))
experience meme )))
but essentially nonsense of course
or can you justify it logically ?
))
experience meme ))
but in essence, it's bullshit.
or are you ready to justify it logically?
Where the hell have you been? Do you know what happens for truancy?
I will not justify it, let it remain nonsense to you, because Komar Khayyam said: "Do not cast your pearls before bears".
I am not going to justify it,
Because it cannot be justified, not logically, not mathematically, not at all.
But it can be explained. It's just a psychological self-deception.
Because it cannot be justified, not logically, not mathematically, not at all.
But it can be explained. It is simply a psychological self-deception.
What is our life? A game... ©
Even if it is a self-deception. I don't know what logic you're talking about, but in my totally_not_Bouleva way, if I'm going to play with money,
it should be with those that I don't feel sorry for and that it's either/or.
I think it is logical to use all available historical data with relatively insignificant profitability for the sake of stability only if one enjoys the process of developing TS and writing an Expert Advisor rather than the result.