Why admin deleted my topic asking if EA is scam or not? - 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
Unfortunately for this one you have to trust the vendor . I'm not saying only one side is wrong . If the test is 50% off by design then an author can claim AI while its a reader and his/hers competitors can claim history reader while its an AI . It cuts both ways unfortunately .
I'm not defending anyone just pointing it out
Q : Why isn't the author providing "config" files that could be loaded from the inputs for the "AI"
A : Because potential clients will lose interest if they see a bad first test , and the "lines being read average" is plummeting by the second , so the client would have to see the instruction for the demo , and i don't even know if its possible to load a configuration file (not a set file) from a market demo . (it could be possible)
Brezekhiel #:if metatrader company is receiving commisions from sales it should allow people to test if EA is complete scam or not, no?
PS: I know how to use strategy tester, and use it (but how can I know if strategy has some repainting, or was trainded only on past data??)
They do allow testing before you buy, but it is up to you to have the knowledge to be able to test and evaluate a product.
If you don't have the skill to be able to test it, then you should not be buying the product at all.
EA's are tools. If you don't have the skill and knowledge to use them, then you should not be using EAs.
I somewhat agree , i read this 4 times to read past the advertisement though .
There is a problem in "backtesting" or "optimization" and the problem is that the human is being "overfitted" along with the model . It is really weird .
But , the human mind in my very amateur opinion has a unique "blurring" ability which allows it to determine what is something or is not if you throw too many examples at it and not be too specific or too broad at the same time . That is due to the hominid branch (our branch) that survived because it could determine danger faster than its ancestors ,and it's also one of the reasons women are better traders than men . But that is another story .
Even the manual discovery process you mentioned has some form of overfitting in it , you just have a sense for what is needed with your experience and you can steer the system that way , whereas an "AI" would be bound by the constraints of what is tested . To be frank that is how i believe the best sellers happen on this market . Someone runs many tests , stumbles upon something and publishes it and then sprinkles some keywords on top , that is true probably , but still it may work for a while if they happen to not overoptimize by accident .
Also a clarification , the AI is as good as you can let it be , for now .
Nice advertising
This is why such topics are not allowed.
Unfortunately for this one you have to trust the vendor . I'm not saying only one side is wrong . If the test is 50% off by design then an author can claim AI while its a reader and his/hers competitors can claim history reader while its an AI . It cuts both ways unfortunately .
I'm not defending anyone just pointing it out
Q : Why isn't the author providing "config" files that could be loaded from the inputs for the "AI"
A : Because potential clients will lose interest if they see a bad first test , and the "lines being read average" is plummeting by the second , so the client would have to see the instruction for the demo , and i don't even know if its possible to load a configuration file (not a set file) from a market demo . (it could be possible)
thanks for all explanations
They do allow testing before you buy, but it is up to you to have the knowledge to be able to test and evaluate a product.
If you don't have the skill to be able to test it, then you should not be buying the product at all.
EA's are tools. If you don't have the skill and knowledge to use them, then you should not be using EAs.
what knowledge are you talking about? If nobody can see soucre code?
Im many years in quant trading and have knowledge, but how you can tell without seeing sorce code? (it may repaint, it may be history reader etc. etc also answers of EA author were weird)
How do the police find criminals?
By investigating—by relying on knowledge and by applying deduction.
If you are not good at that, then don't buy EAs—make your own or have someone code your strategies for you.
How do the police find criminals?
By investigating—by relying on knowledge and by applying deduction.
If you are not good at that, then don't buy EAs—make your own or have someone code your strategies for you.
Yes but police have access almost everywhere - by law. There are places where you cannot go, servers that you cannot read, etc. but police can.
Here you are just basic user and goverment (here Meta team) dont give you privileges to investigate same like police have = you cannot go to source code.
Im sure they would have ability to test EA if it is 100% serious, if do not use history reading etc. but maybe dont care because business is business = more copies are solr more % commison they get.
The most wanted EA
If you're referring to the "Most Wanted" EA, I can confirm it was a scam, so there's no need to invest your time in it. I personally tested the last three versions of the EA using the same date range and shared the results with the author in his Telegram channel as we couldn't add comments unless we buy the product. Shortly after, the author disappeared. Despite this, many people continue to pursue the scam.
Here's another simple method to test an EA to verify if it's optimized for historical data only. However, this process requires patience. Rushing to buy the EA is exactly what the scammer wants:
1. Download at least 3 latest versions of EA and store them in a separate folders. This step is necessary as updating to new EA version will overwrite the old one.
2. Test each version across date range, starting from the initial release date up to the current date and keep a record of significant loss trades during this period.
3. If you noticed loss trades in an older version that isn't present in the next versions, it could be indicative of scam EA fitted to historical data as the author keeps updating it every few weeks to align the backtest with the most recent market conditions, often claiming it's just a bug fix !
As a software developer, I understand the process of fixing program bugs. However, when someone consistently releases new version every few weeks and at the same time presents a long history of successful backtests, it raises significant concerns, especially for a program intended to operate in a changing market.