Scam EAs in Market - 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
yeah and some are outright fake but some they simply did not include the news filter.
I wonder why professional programmers would program and leave out such filters.
I totally agree with all that you said, but personally I think that if there are people who think that an automated strategy can have 100% of profit trades and double the account in few weeks, the problem is not of the seller but of the buyer who believe in fairy tales.
There are things outside of backtests to verify the validity of an EA, like real track records, which on these system never exists.
If someone sell for $200 a system that promise to transform $200 in a million in 2 months, there is something that smell bad, and who do not put this into doubt and do not understand this probably deserves to loose his money due to his negligence.
yeah and some are outright fake but some they simply did not include the news filter.
I wonder why professional programmers would program and leave out such filters.
The news filters are just marketing by the developer, as he knows perfectly well that they do not work in backtests and therefore it is not possible to know their effectiveness.
It only ensures that we will not have trades during macroeconomic news and makes us get a very different risk/reward in the strategy tester vs. live.
The news filters are just marketing by the developer, as he knows perfectly well that they do not work in backtests and therefore it is not possible to know their effectiveness.
It only ensures that we will not have trades during macroeconomic news and makes us get a very different risk/reward in the strategy tester vs. live.
Yes and no, it's possible to use news filters into backtests too, with proper coding
Yes or no? Both cannot be.
In the strategy tester external calls are forbidden, so it is not a coding issue, it is simply not possible. At least for Market products without *.dll (also forbidden).
Yes or no? Both cannot be.
In the strategy tester external calls are forbidden, so it is not a coding issue, it is simply not possible. At least for Market products without *.dll (also forbidden).
It can be both. You can code a news filter to be backtested or not, It's up to you.
Let's define a news filter (what you are proposing is a time filter, not a news filter).
A news filter as such makes external calls to a website and knows exactly when (time and day) a macro publication, etc. will be released.
What you are proposing (and trying to put in the same bag) is a time filter that would not take into account if the news is low/medium/high impact. It would be a "dumb" function that would interrupt trading perhaps without being necessary.
Please, I don't want to discuss the indisputable. Don't mix concepts and lengthen what was simply a comment on my part. Whoever wants to understand me, please do so.
Thank you!
If you don't know how to make a thing or do not understand it, don't blame other people.
We are not debating whether it is possible or not possible. Obviously there are always ways.
But understand that when I make a statement it is based on the download of a product from the Market of an average customer without knowledge that in many occasions doesn't know how an EA works, let alone how to download a *.csv, etc.
If you had a bad day don't take it out on others. Some of us are in the business of informing, not of making a point about everything that others say.
It is not a question of more or less knowledge (I don't know yours, nor do you know mine). If you think you are better than someone because you misunderstand something, maybe you have a problem.
I recommend to MetaQuotes to hold the money after the client purchases any product for at least 3 months. And if no complains from client, then release the money to the seller. Otherwise to refund the money to the client. This will push away scam EA sellers.
In this time, the client can test the product and see of there is something wrong.
Your proposal (although to some extent understandable and makes sense), is totally unfeasible. No programmer would publish products to charge for them 3 months later.
Besides, there are many customers who don't even know what they are buying or are simply "haters" who think everything is bad or can be improved, so there would be an avalanche of people asking for refunds after 3 months and even people who in those 3 months have already amortized the EA and by requesting the refund the move would be a good one (free EA + the profit of those 3 months).