How do you improve signal reliability by all five? - page 2
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 reliability - is one of the main indicators of the signal for the buyer! If the indicator is given, it should be calculated correctly, not just randomly... While the indicator is a fiction - it does not correspond to its value and confuses the buyer... It should not be like this!
And how do you assess this "reliability"?
You just have to formulate what "reliability" of the signal means - it's already difficult. The more precisely you formulate it, the worse it will work.
And it's not even clear how to evaluate it.
For me - the only accurate indicator of signal quality - is the real Equity on it. It is this figure that tells you what the ISP itself thinks of the signal. All estimates are secondary.
And how do you assess this "reliability"?
You just have to formulate what "reliability" of the signal means - it's already difficult. The more precisely you formulate it, the worse it will work.
And it is even more difficult to evaluate it.
And why this question is addressed to me...?
If the HOPE calculation itself is to be discussed, then you can offer your options...
Why is this question addressed to me...?
If the HOPE calculation itself is to be discussed, then you can offer your options...
Well, you say that "reliability is one of the main indicators". And I argue that this indicator is very intuitive. And with intuitive indicators, you know, you can twist and turn in very wide limits... There is no objectivity...
Well, you say that "reliability is one of the main indicators". And I argue that this indicator is very intuitive. And with intuitive indicators, you know, you can twist and turn in very wide limits... There is no objectivity...
Are you just messing around or do you really not understand simple things?
If there is an indicator, it should give a real picture! Otherwise it should simply be removed, and not give false information to the Buyer...
Well, you say that "reliability is one of the main indicators". And I argue that this indicator is very intuitive. And with intuitive indicators, you know, you can twist and turn very widely... There is no objectivity...
It seems to me that the most important criterion for reliability is the Recovery Factor - the ratio of net profit to maximum drawdown.
Are you kidding or do you really not understand simple things?
If there is an indicator, it should give the real picture! Otherwise it should just be removed, and not give false information to the Buyer...
Really?
The indicator only tells us that certain properties of an object (in this case a trade or the EA itself) have some values. ALL.
Until there is a strict definition of 'reliability' - no indicator can 'give a true picture of reliability'. This indicator will only give a true picture of that indicator.
It seems to me that the most important criterion for reliability is the Recovery Factor - the ratio of net profit to maximal drawdown.
And how do you tell the difference between a signal where your recovery is the result of a real pattern and a signal where the recovery is the result of chance?
It is the real Equity in the account - and it shows what the signal provider himself thinks about his signal.
If the Equity on the signal is low, it means that the signal provider himself does not believe in his signal, and believes that the signal can be lost at any time. If the Equity on the signal is high, it means provider is confident about his signal. And in the latter case, the Equity may even be much lower than in the first case - nevertheless, the signal will be more trustworthy.
And how do you tell the difference between a signal where your recovery is the result of real use of a pattern and a signal where the recovery is the result of pure chance?
It is the real Equity in the account which shows what the signal provider himself thinks about his signal.
If the Equity on the signal is low - this means that the provider himself does not believe in his signal and believes that the signal can be lost at any time. If the Equity on the signal is high, it means provider is confident in his signal. And in the latter case, the Equity may even be much lower than in the first case - nevertheless, the signal will be more trustworthy.
Completely misinterpretation of the reliability problem. If the equity is low and the drawdown is high, we will automatically obtain low FS. The main purpose of trading is to gain profit and we must pay attention to this fact. FS shows the risk level at which the profit is obtained. At FS = 10 we judge that, the probability of profit or loss is 10/1, which is very good, and the TS is very reliable. At FS = 1 the probability of profit and loss are equal and the TS can be qualified as unreliable.
I don't understand why you should worry about ratings, about reliability... I'm sure it's only those who understand that their signal isn't worth shit and is only organised to "make money off the sucker".
If you are confident in your signal, you do not care about rating and reliability.
And if your signal gives at least a thousand percent a year, with a maximum drawdown of a couple of percent - then your subscribers will not give a damn about ratings and reliability.
Why bother? Work for yourself, improve your performance and you'll be fine!
I don't know. Perfectionism.
I now have +20% in 3 days to my depo, with stops at a 2% drawdown. (bragging). But I still want everything to be neat and green and without annoying warnings)
Here I am now at +20% to depo in 3 days, with stops at a 2% drawdown. (bragging). But I still want everything to be neat, green and without annoying warnings)Reminds me:
Going to live forever. As long as things are going well.