Record on the Market - page 33
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 believe it is necessary to create a system for a deeper evaluation of products produced under the "machines" of local specialists.
Work out quality gradients, as profitability in the first place!
It is obligatory to take into account the diversity of functionality of products created according to TOR, the speed of execution of work, as well as non-standard solutions.
The uniqueness of the completed work among the mass of EAs/indicators, etc..
Single orders completed by one performer, along with the failure of the same order from other professionals - put in a separate checklist that counts some points, or something like that, tagged "no analogues, unique work.
These are interesting suggestions, but unfortunately useless.
If we offer utilities that implement custom automation (and trade instead of Expert Advisors), then the quality rating will be natural and logical, because the concept of utilities is clear to everyone.
The market will continue to fail to make money, but it will not be the entire programs, but only the custom settings and specific strategies, which can be infinitely many. When there are losses, users will criticise their trading, not the developer.
I believe it is necessary to create a system for a deeper evaluation of products produced under the "machines" of local specialists.
Work out quality gradients, like profitability in the first place!
...
Eliminate"profitability" as a criterion for evaluating programs and everything will fall into place.
Programs can be evaluated however you want, but NOT on the basis of relevance. Because sooner or later, by profitability, their place turns out to be in the trash bin.
Only specific strategies and settings should be evaluated by profitability. Not entire programs.
And advisers have always been and will always be evaluating onlyBy Profitability. Therefore, this is a dead end of the whole 'advisors' product category.
I believe there is a need for a system of more in-depth evaluation of products coming out from under the 'machines' of local specialists.
Banned for posting a decompilation order in Freelance. Doesn't read the rules and warnings, but gives advice.
And if you add to the product search criteria on the marketplace the item: "Has online account monitoring", how much convenience we get.
The author is required to create a signal with the name of the product being broadcast and check it, like here
And already at the stage of searching for an Expert Advisor, the user will immediately eliminate a lot of products that do not have real account monitoring, which will reduce the search time.
Remove"profitability" as a criterion for evaluating programmes and everything falls into place.
Programmes can be evaluated however you like, but NOT by profitability. Because, sooner or later, they will end up in the dustbin, according to profitability.
Only specific strategies and settings should be evaluated by profitability. Not entire programs.
And advisors have always evaluated and will always only evaluateProfitability.. Therefore, this is a dead end of the whole "advisors" product category.
How many programs have you written to come to such a conclusion? Or what did the money in the tram say?
"Has online account monitoring", then how much convenience do we get.
Yes, not at all. it makes sense to monitor the Expert Advisor on the real account by another proxy, such as meta-quotes. but this will not happen.
So you're happy with all the experts out there? Are you ready to spend your time on browsing beautiful tester pictures that even a demo signal cannot be attached to?
How many programmes have you written that draw this conclusion? Or did the doughboys on the tram talk?
You optimise parameters all the time. Right? - This means that over time, their values no longer match the dynamics of the Market.
You are constantly coming up with new strategies. Right? - It means that the strategies also stop matching the market dynamics.
If the Expert Advisor has one strategy and a narrow range of settings, it will soon stop matching the market dynamics and fail.
If the Expert Advisor has one strategy, it will be quickly written off.
If you endlessly fill the Market with Expert Advisors, each of which has 1 strategy and a small range of settings, then they will constantly be written off by the buyers and ... get disappointed.
Over time, the disappointment will accumulate and lead to the loss of public interest. This means that the developers' income will decrease. The niche will shrink.
If each EA contains flexible settings for the set of different strategies, the task of setting up automatism will fall on the buyer. Expert Advisors will not be quickly written off.
Only these EAs will already have a different concept and will become similar to utilities.
You are constantly optimising the parameters. Right? - This means that, over time, their values no longer match the dynamics of the Market.
You are constantly coming up with new strategies. Right? - It means that the strategies also stop matching the market dynamics.
If the Expert Advisor has one strategy and a narrow range of settings, it will soon stop matching the market dynamics and fail.
If the Expert Advisor has one strategy, it will be quickly written off.
If you endlessly fill the Market with Expert Advisors, each of which has 1 strategy and a small range of settings, then they will constantly be written off by the buyers and ... get disappointed.
Over time, the disappointment will accumulate and lead to the loss of public interest. This means that the developers' income will decrease. The niche will shrink.
If each EA contains flexible settings for the set of different strategies, the task of setting up automatism will fall on the buyer. Expert Advisors will not be quickly written off.
Only these EAs will already have a different concept and will become similar to utilities.
Peter, it's simple: make utilities and publish them on the market. That's it. The rest is populism.
So you're happy with all the experts out there? Are you ready to waste your time looking through beautiful tester pictures, which even the demo signal does not manage to pick up?
I will buy only utilities, libraries and datafeeds from the market.
The signal from the author of the Expert Advisor on which it kind of runs shows nothing. i.e. nothing at all. this has been discussed more than once.
Although, okay, it shows that the Expert Advisor is the bottom if the signal is lost and the author has not deleted it from the profile ))