How do you improve signal reliability by all five? - page 8
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
George, the DC where I work has completely eliminated the concept of "balance" from their analyses and reports, they only use "funds" and the confusion has disappeared. I'm sure everyone will do so soon.
No way... The phenomenon itself will not disappear just because the concept has been removed from the report. The balance is an account of closed positions, and rightly written above - it is the balance that is displayed.
Moreover, it is exactly the difference between balance and funds that allows us to sift out all sorts of MM tricks such as martingale or averaging.
I stopped looking at the balance too. Now I'm less radical.
They won't.
A balance is real money, which can be both withdrawn and deposited. Funds are virtual money, the state of which changes all the time and depends on the current profit (both minus and plus).
Funds are only counted when there are open positions.
In fact they are all interlinked and all are needed. Not only the funds, but also the free margin and the level of margin etc.
All of them are necessary to comply with the MM.
And to increase the reliability of the signal, you need to reduce the deposit load, the less the better, but the profit will also be less.
Balance is more of a legal concept, as it has a right of use in its content. Equity is one of the conditions limiting the right to use the balance if the equity is less than it, and asserting the right to use it if the equity is greater than the balance.
Therefore, it is better to prioritise equity for any reports because it gives an objective picture.
I browsed through the signals five days ago, one has a 30% drawdown, the other has a depo load of about 100, both have 5 reliability sticks. I have 4% drawdown, 30% deposit load, - 4 sticks of reliability.
And what is your own Equity on both signals, and what is the duration of the trade?
And what is your own Equity on both signals, and what is the duration of the trade ?
Even hypothetically, the drawdown cannot be zero, so FS is a necessary and sufficient parameter for the effectiveness and reliability of any TS. I personally seek its maximum value on the history, and do not pay attention to any other trading parameters.
How much is the maximal FS value... and what value did your best TS reach...?
I understand that all parameters are tied to each other, but still do not believe that ONE parameter can give the OPTIMAL configuration of the best TS..., and by it you can give an unambiguous decision about the TS...
How much is the max FS value...? , and what value did your best TS achieve...?
I understand that all parameters are tied to each other, but I still do not believe that ONE parameter can give the OPTIMAL configuration of the best TS..., and it can give an unambiguous decision about the TS...
Sergey, right now I'm inclined to think that, FS is counted incorrectly. I think the definition of FS as FS = Net Profit/Maximum Drawdown does not reflect the danger that lies in such a definition of FS as a reliability factor. Here's the thing: we take the net profit on an accrual basis for the whole time of trading, and the maximal drawdown - for a short time when it occurs. This results in exaggerated values of FV misleading a trader. It seems to me the drawdown should also be cumulative, but I do not know how to do it.
How much is the max FS value... , and what value did your best TS achieve...?
I understand that all parameters are tied to each other, but I still don't believe that ONE parameter can give the OPTIMAL configuration of the best TS..., and one can give an unambiguous decision about the TS by it...
FV doesn't tell you anything. The account may have good FS values, but the trade is average. You may look at it as an indicator but you shouldn't rely on it.