For those who are convinced that all EAs with a martin are losing out. - page 43
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
It's even worse than it looked. It turns out that the EA works on ticks, but you are testing on oupen M15. So those pictures and reports at the beginning of the thread are nothing?
This is not a competition, this is a forum, my dear.
I warned you about testing, if you want to step on the same rake, I won't force you to. Go ahead.
For the one who trades monthly cycles, and does not load the deposit with bullshit, the tick price values do not matter. Is that clear, Mr. Pipsqueak?
You shouldn't have started the garden-variety theme, humour is more to your liking.
The Expert Advisor works on oupens. But understand one thing - the maximum drawdown, despite the fact that theopening and closing of orders only in oupen, is determined by ticks, regardless of whether you filter them or not. Run your EA in the tester, setting the mode by tick and then by open prices and you will see that the maximum drawdown will be different.
If the EA works on oupens, then I agree. It's just that on the previous pages you wrote that you were working on ticks, that confused me.
As for the theme of the topic. Why do you actually refer to the strategy with an averaging entry as a pure martin? The only way to call it a martin is to use random entry and stupid doubling of the lot to win. Surely this is not an exhaustive algorithm of your EA?
When we build a stock portfolio, for example, the averaging strategy is not only not flawed, it is the only correct one. Yes, of course, the stock market is not forex. The fund is a bull market and forex is a flat market. There we work only from buying, and here we work short as well. So an averaging strategy in a flat is more stable, isn't it?
So if you're looking for the answer to the question "Is it realistic to earn on an averaging strategy? The answer may be positive if you remove the explicit signs of martin from your EA.
... Why do you call a strategy with an averaging entry a pure martin? The only way to call it a martin is to use random entry and stupid doubling of the lot to win. Surely this is not an exhaustive algorithm for your EA?
For someone who trades monthly cycles, and doesn't load the deposit full of shit, tick price values are irrelevant...
For someone who trades monthly cycles, and doesn't load the deposit full of shit, tick price values are irrelevant. Is that clear, Mr. Pipsqueak?
To the one who trades, everything matters.
There are many different versions. There are versions that use pure martin where opening is done on the fly without any indicators, but nevertheless they have not lost money in the tester since 1999. Although the ratio of profit to drawdown in such versions is not high.
I am aware of what versions the forum users are using. But you've opened a topic, posted a picture of a particular version, and want to know the opinion of the forum.
What can you say about a black box that has been tested on synthetic history since 1999? Absolutely nothing. It's a gamer's game.
If you want specifics, lay out the basic principles of the EA. Don't you want to? So we are not talking about anything.
If a person is suicidal, what can I do? If they don't, they don't.
Non-institutional pipsqueaks are suicidal. I am not one of those. You probably are.
For someone who trades, everything matters.
You're on. It matters. It's insignificant.