Criteria for getting signals to the top - page 23
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
We look at the number of warnings. If there are too many of them, the signal will be deleted from the storefront, despite the highest rating.
I frankly don't understand what these warnings mean:
80% of trades made in 132 days. That's 15% of the signal's total lifetime of 877 days."
How are they calculated? 80% of increment done in 10 days? What does it mean?
I, for example, have trades almost every day and have similar warnings. They show absolutely no objective information.
It could be that in 877 days the trade was active for 10 days. For example, 867 days it was carried out with minimal lot, and 10 days the trader was trading the whole cut. It may be that the strategy shows such statistics. And this is normal for it. Adequate risks were observed all the time. But let's say, breakdowns were traded and such a curve in statistics has been obtained.
It seems to me these warnings only scare subscribers away and are of no practical use.
Or am I wrong? Please explain.
It could be that in 877 days the trade was active for 10 days. For example, 867 days it was trading with minimal lot, and 10 days the trader was trading the whole cut. It may be that the strategy shows such statistics. And this is normal for it. Adequate risks were observed all the time. But let's say the breakdowns were traded and the curve of such statistics has turned out.
Subscribers are not interested in signals that earn 5-10% of the time and chew up the market the rest of the time. So they need to know what the strategy is.
In my opinion - this indicator simply misleads them. Neither more nor less. Who says you have to constantly open and close positions to be in profit?
In order to know what the strategy is, the trades history and the equity and balance sheet growth chart are sufficient.We have a new expert here every week giving out free advice. That's normal.
We look at the number of warnings, if there are a lot of them, then let the rating be the highest - the signal is removed from the showcase.
So, when a certain number of warnings are accumulated, the signal is removed from the window or what?
Then it turns out that if the so-called " drawdown" is often around 30% plus minus - then the account enters this 30% "drawdown" - and the warning after a few hours - goes out and the warning disappears. And so repeatedly. So there is a decent amount of them accumulated.
And now the real reason for the " drawdown".
Something about the "so called drawdown" which reflects the difference between the equity line and the balance line divided by the balance. This indicator may not be relevant at all.
For example, let us assume that balance = 1300 and there are two trades amounting to -400 and +300 (total -100 is outstanding), i.e. equity = 1200 and the drawdown in this case equals 7.7%. And now if we close the trade with +300
we get the following picture: balance = 1600 = -400 Equity is floundering, the same 1200 but the drawdown is already equal to 25%.
Thus, the drawdown ratio can both increase and decrease. But what is the point in decreasing the drawdown by closing temporarily loss-making trades to prevent the drawdown growth?
Or, there can be a situation when equity does not change and profitable trades are fixed while loss-making trades are not fixed, but the drawdown grows?
It all resembles a "drawdown" like this: someone bought land, built a house and rents it out, but at first the rent does not go - not all the apartments are occupied, while the costs are there and they exceed the income from rents. (Either it's off-season and the rent is in the resort area) Then, by analogy with "drawdown", everything has to be closed....
Or another example, there is an auto service, a profitable business, but for the convenience of waiting customers, there is also a cafe and something else waiting-entertaining. But this all for the convenience of customers is unprofitable. Then according to the logic of "drawdown" we should leave only the car service and close the entertainment business. (And customers will go to another car service where it's all there).
I hope it is clear that the "drawdown" is not always what is relevant.
The point of getting rid of a property previously bought for 30% more than its current price.
So, when a certain number of warnings are accumulated, the signal is removed from the window or what?
Then it turns out that if the so-called " drawdown" is often around 30% plus minus - then the account enters this 30% "drawdown" - and the warning after a few hours - goes out and the warning disappears. And so repeatedly. So there is a decent amount of them accumulated.
It's very simple...
Open trades that do not cause drawdown))))
Or at least information for the signal provider can be made that "Your signal is unavailable in the signal window for such and such reason. You will be available again after......".
To make it clear what's going on
We look at the number of warnings, and if there are many, even if the rating is the highest, the signal is removed from the showcase.
How many is how many?
Or at least information for the signal provider can be made that "Your signal is unavailable in the signal window for such and such reason. You will be available again after......".
To make it clear what's going on
I don't think it is possible - there should be some logic to explain why. And how, for example, to logically explain that my most aggressive signal was out of rating for more than a month and returned there only after making the first loss? Has it become safer from the system authors' point of view, when a deposit has decreased by 20% for a day? ;) But the warning about too high average monthly growth has disappeared, despite the fact that subscribers were not so happy about it. And apparently, when the loss is recovered, this warning will return and the signal will be removed from the rating again :)