For EA Addicts Only: Show Us Your Best EA Results
Page 1 of 732 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 318

Thread: For EA Addicts Only: Show Us Your Best EA Results

  1. #1
    OK.. .Show us your very best EA results. . .can be live or demo. Additionally, it may be from something you've seen elsewhere, provided that you have the permission are permitted to post it.

    Here are the guidelines for the EA results to ensure it is fair (please follow to keep it real):

    1. Max Leverage 100:1.
    This is due to the fact that most brokers only allow for 100 or even 200:1 if your account is over 20k. At the U.S. maximum leverage is just 50:1, therefore testing an EA at 100:1 or not as is realistic.

    2. Max Stop Outside Level 50 percent
    (although your broker could be at 20%, most brokers have stop workouts at 50 percent ). This is also to keep it sensible. For instance if you have a losing trade at maximum leverage utilizing maximum account equity and balance, you can lose up to 50% of your equity at one losing trade.

    3. Less or 1 year returns.
    Show us your very best results to get a year or less.

    4. Here is the biggie: Start with $100 no longer.
    That is right beginning with one hundred dollars. Let us see how much you can increase $100 in up to a year. Can you make $100 turn at $100k or more?

    5. Relative and max Drawdown limitation of 90%.
    Most traders couldn't plogically withstand continuing to trade any system or procedure after losing 75% of the equity. But because we are just starting with $100 USD, feel free to take it to the extreme.

    6. No Martingale egies.
    Dynamic standing sizing, a.k.a. pyramiding is encouraged, but Martingale isn't. Read further down in this thread, if you are not sure of the gap between the two and there is an explanation between both. Would like to attempt not to have this turned into comprehend the nuances of money management and position sizing that is lively.

    7. Stops must be traded with by EA. No open ended losses.

    Guidelines 7 and 6 above prevent EA from dropping it all on one single bad trade. Some form of controlled place sizing or cash management must be part of the EA.

    8. EA needs to have traded at 33 trades. More is preferable if possible.
    The more transactions over a longer time frame make it more statistically relevant. However, the number of trades does not guarantee that the profitably and the long term tradability of an EA.

    9. You must be prepared to justify your results, although feel free to post any modeling quality.

    10. When it's an EA on a demo account, the EA must be executable in a live account and live trading environment.

    11. Finally. The EA must be fully automated without manual intervention loaded.
    What good is an EA if it is not 100% hands free? Really. An EA that requires manual intervention involving transactions is another instrument or indior. A 100% automated EA (as intended), if correctly executed is plogically and fiscally liberating and frees you from the tension of having to monitor the markets each trading session. So just true EAs please.

    It's possible to discuss your method supporting the results if you wish or keep them confidential. It's your EA, it is up to you.

    It'll be interesting to observe how lots of EA's are out there that can take $100 and turn it into $100,000 or more in a year on a 100:1 leverage account or less. So in the event that you have one, please reveal it. Unless you want to you don't need to show trade documents.

    The purpose of this thread is to show what's possible with EAs, and also to open discussion concerning the merits/demerits of every EA.

    Let us see the capacity of what's possible with EAs and also explore the probability of getting those results duplied in live forward trading.

  2. #2
    The EA is not mine.

    Apparently it was created in some backroom and then utilized to scam traders from their hard earned cash....lol

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote But the open trades, will be profitable or shut in a predetermined and premanaged cease right? Ended you ought to be secure So long as they are not open. quote
    I have it set to open a maximum of 12 trades, and if all 12 trades were to discontinue out before the next win, then the prospective reduction is roughly 25% of their account (25% drawdown possible ).

    It'd surely have to be a really extraordinary event during that.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote Wow... clearly a back evaluation or maybe a forward evaluation demo. If its great in demo, you'd be a nutcase to not risk a few hundred dollar reside account.
    I am nuts either way. Ha!

    I have a prior version of this EA reside with marginally less leverage per trade, which will be running fairly close to what was expected and that which was indied in backtesting. In fact, real trades would be the very same ones that show up in transactions in evaluation mode. To put it differently, the algorithm is in accord with the data on any data be reside and real, or it backtested, or backtested with demo forward.

    So far as the current version goes, I stumbled into into it last week by first slightly changing the decision making algorithm and then running a non-genetic algorithm evaluation that moved through 2.9 million scenarios, then tested on demo and live statistics. After two days of 24/7 running an evaluation, I had an idea regarding hybrid and take profit levels which I implemented which raised the profitability a bit more. Recently it began with real $.

    The superb evaluation to me, real evaluation, are to see how this EA reacts with multiple brokers and numerous spreads on multiple accounts. Theoretically, a strong profitable EA ought to be profitable on almost any broker's platform and take the very same signals in the same time or very. Most EAs indior established EAs generate various signals on various brokers with mixed results, but because this is PA established, theoretically it should perform similarly taking disperse into account even with brokers. That's a completely different test for discussion.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    The EA isn't mine. Apparently it was made in certain backroom and then used to scam traders from their hard earned cash....lol
    Well, I'm tired of EAs that article 100% wins within an important period. Anything more than 50 trades using a win rate deserves to be inspected and anything with over a 70% win rate should have some discussion about money management and position sizing.

    An EA must account for losing transactions, along with series of losing transactions.

    Any trader that spent in that EA isn't a trader but (can not think of a phrase I can post here).

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote Any trader who spent in that EA is not a trader but (can't think of a word I will post here).
    Fuckwit comes to mind

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote I have it set to start a max of 12 trades, and when all 12 trades were to stop out before another triumph, then the potential loss is about 25% of their account (25% drawdown possible ). It would have to be a event at that.
    So basically you're saying that you would take a 25% total loss to max principal at any particular time. Obviously as the equity of one increases, the trend is to wish to defend the equity, but at what stage would you be willing to bring a higher loss for a profit that is higher? I'm not talking about gaming. I'm talking about testing the EA that is same on another smaller or little account with higher lev?

    It's Only a philosophical question. Each trader has their own objectives.

    For instance, I'd risk 80 percent of $100 or even 80 percent of $1000, but not directly 80 percent of $10,000, unless that $10,000 was free and clear profit.

    At $100,000, even though it was free and clear profit, I wouldn't risk 80 percent of. I'm prepared to risk 25% of $100,000.

    In a 1,000,000 I'm only prepared to risk about 10% total drawdown, which depending on the system can be still accomplished using a 2% maximum dd per trade. Where of course, with starting equity sums such as $100, $1000, or $10,000 I'm prepared to risk much more per trade.

    I have a much higher risk tolerance than many. Many would call me nuts. But there are more crazy traders who do not trade with a safety net.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote So basically you are saying that you'd take a 25% complete loss to max principal at any given time. Clearly as one's equity increases, at what point would you be ready to take a greater loss for a gain, although the tendency is to wish to protect the equity? I am not talking about gaming. I am talking about analyzing the EA that is same on a different little or smaller account with greater lev? It's just a philosophical question. Each trader has their own goals. For example, I would risk 80 percent of $100 or even 80 percent of $1000, but not directly...
    Well, if I had a job (a safety net) I would take a lot more risk, but I am a retired old fart residing off the old-age retirement, and paying rent... there is not much week left at the conclusion of my cash.

    This is something to pass time rather than watching TV or playing . My other cash making/saving hobbies include brewing my own beer and distilling my spirits.


    As my account develops I'll likely reduce my risk further.

    I'm tempted to open a tiny high leveraged account and go for broke tho... there is a broker in NZ that offers 2000:1 on a max $500 account.

  9. #9
    Incidently... for anybody wanting to save money to open a live account, if you are a drinker, learn to make your own booze and bank the money you save. I save about $50 per week by making my toxin.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by ;
    quote Well, if I had a job (a safety net) I'd take a lot more risk, but I'm a retired old fart residing off the old-age pension, also paying rent... there is not a week left in the end of my cash. That is something to pass time instead of watching TV or playing with myself. My cash making/saving hobbies include brewing my own beer, cider and distilling my own spirits. As my account develops I will probably lower my risk further. I am tempted to open a small high leveraged account and select broke tho... there is a broker in NZ that offers...
    2000:1 reeks of scam broker. But even when they're legit, it is not sustainable, what happens when your account gets to $5000 or $50,000. No true broker in the world will give you on a $50k account.

    I see your account such as...I'm not saying you ought to change your leverage on your account. Just tossing around another possibility on another account, without sacrificing your current scenario, which I would not ever, since there is no need.

    I think I recall you saying that you're trading .01 lot for every $1000 with 12 max open transactions and calculating prevent levels, a max dd of 25% worst case. Simple math will say .02 per $1000 equals risk, and .03 per $1000 equals 75 percent risk. Of course more risk equals equity swings. But with equity you might potentially gain than a 3x profit but with 3x risk. One potential problem is that with 12 max open positions at .03 your exposure at any given time will most likely be greater than your broker's stop out flat, so your positions might get closed out before your stops are naturally strike, so .02 per $1000 are the next logical dimension to test if you haven't tested it already.

    In .02 per thousand, at 50:1 max leverage, you're looking at about* $30 each .01 x 12 positions required which would be about $720 in equity ($750 to be conservative) needed to exchange it (50:1 leverage, roughly $30 each .01, .02 per place, 12 open positions, therefore 12 x $60 margin demanded ). Of course if ALL positions get stopped out as you mentioned you're looking at $360 in equity or a 50% instant dd in which the event your EA will revert to .01 each place. It is only food for thought. Obviously you've got some type of MM algorithm either coded or manually inputted to your EA so experimentation with different levels should yield an alternate potentially acceptable speculative general risk vs. overall reward situations for one more account for you.

    In any case, my point is that it does not require you to go to a different higher leverage broker to achieve your idea. You could do it with the same broker if they supply sub accounts or using an broker that offers realistic and reasonable leverage levels.

    Actually with your current position sizing as well as the one discussed above they may be accomplished in 50:1 quite easily, and in 50:1 you are still protecting yourself from potentially massive damage in the event of unforeseen and unaccounted for events. Of course with roughly $1500 in beginning equity you could even exchange *your machine * using a max leverage of 25:1 which is safer. Food for thought.

    [ Note for thread: I say *his egy * since MM ought to be energetic and appropriate for every person's risk tolerance, beginning capital, and characteristics of their trading system or procedure and overall trading goals appropriate to the system or complete risk capital dedied. This thread is Beginning to become a Money Management thread, and I'd like to keep it a Super Profitable EA thread rather ]

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners.