3000$ TP at 30 pip, and 0.06 in EqutyDrop but with “AccountBalance()” in function
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/93453374/rev2-2-5/Strategy%20Tester_%20Greenland%20strategy%20rev%202-2.pdf
looks very nice until the last drop
it looks like its more critical in the begining, once you have enough capital it does not have a big impact with drops, if you look at your test, and mine, mine is started at a different time (01/01/2010 and with 30 pip instead of 50 pip)
I’m trying with a start capital of $2000 now.
Then it should work with a 0,5% = lotsize 0,01 at leverage x100
But in my case. I need to use 0,8% to get a lotsize of 0,01.
It is really strange.
then at ca. $3860 it raises to lotsize 0,02
I can’t seem to find out this.
I will put the test here when it is finished.
unfortunately it got stopped out after a year.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B9TqqPkn7fT6THQydG5kTXl5QlU/edit?usp=sharing
If its not too much of a hassle, could someone write a quick step-by-step guide to how you can make your own backtests.
I have access to a demo MT4 account, but unsure which kind of data to download, how to export it, and how/where to run the backtest.
Would like to be able to make my own tests on various pairs, with various starting equities, drawdown/equity-drop levels, various pairs etc. to see how the EA fares in different conditions.
Thanks in advance.
i have a leverage of x888 and use the 0.1% to get a lotsize of 0,01
that % works with both 2000 and 3000 in start capital by the way…
here is an easy way… googles first result 
How to run back test on MT4 forex platform - YouTube
EDIT: i have followed this guide to get more precise results, but 2 things happend.
- the EA would not open trades, as it could not determin lot sizes from % (works with a fixed lot size, but then why test in the first place)
- after importing the data in 1 MT4, the history data in my other MT4 installations was somehow also affected, and corrupted (wee)
so im now using MT4 on another computer to do tests, until i have found out how data from one install can affect another, when they are installed in different folders, and even from different brokers… 
Ok… So now I am backtesting… But its very slow…
Any tips on optimizing the setttings. Initially I got an error, but think it was because I didn’t have a lot-size. Now I put in 0.1
So settings: Should I chose 1M chart? And should I have visuals enabled or not?
Suggestions welcome.
You choose the “chart” to use in the drop down box called “Period” (use M1) in the settings tab. Visual mode adds oodles of time to the process, so don’t turn it on unless you are looking for something special (or a short time test).
Re
D
yes, DONT use “Visual mode”… its a time killer 
by the way, i could not get auto lot size to work if im not connected to my real MT4 account while doing my tests… didnt even work when i was connected to my demo account
And what about ‘optimization’. What does that do? Just a box I can tick…
dont tick it, dont use it
i have edited my last post by the way, and added something
It will re-run the test with different variable sizes. “What if I increase variable x to 5%, what happens then?” It’s mostly useful for EA’s that trade using some sort of indicator combination.
Re
D
There’s a lot of focus on equity right now, but I’m wondering about margin. All the tests I’ve run implodes when we run out of money. Either we do not have enough to open a needed primer, or just unable to sustain drawdown. Difficult to tell as margin isn’t included in the data. I’ve sprinkled some print statements throughout the code with AccountFreeMargin, and it looks to me like it hovers around opening level while lots are 0.01. Sometimes the first few primers increases it, but the earnings are immideatly used to increase lot sizes and from there free margin steadily falls until crash. What does the system say about margin?
Re
D
I agree that we need to solve this. I showed the recent tests to a forex friend, and he immediately pointed out the large draw-downs. The only ‘run without a breakdown’ from 2009 until today ends with a 70% dd, and it is impossible to tell if it can recover from that or not.
Variables that can be changed could be things like:
- starting deposit (i.e. will 3000 USD instead of 2000 USD on the GBP increase chances? Starting out with 0.01 lots).
- primer sizing
- TP sizing
- equity drop (from 1-6% percents)
Still a lot of tests to be run; maybe even in a systematic way, collecting the results in an excel sheet to find the optimal balance of the variables.
remember that MT4 closes all open trades when a backtest ends?
Sgude0, as long as the channel is build up, the profits should be re-invested to increase the lot size… this will keep the equity low as long as its building… the primers need to take care of the drawdown (in both directions), even though i have heard viking say that if the market is extremely volitile when you get to a lot increase, its better to whait a little with the increase… but i really dont think there is an easy way to impliment that into an EA
Yes I am aware of that. This drop happens before the close. But is probably one of the factors for running out of cash.
Another thing: Did we ever fix the way the EA handles reaching levels where old trades with lower lot-size are reached? I think that should help quite a bit with the growth of the channel if we could fix it so that if a 0.4-lot meets a 0.1 trade the trade will be modified or an additional 0.3 lot trade will be opened.
And if we fix this it might improve overall survivability of the channel since we are able to profit fully from movements in ‘old territory’ which is likely what happens before we reach primer-land, and could be one of the reasons we don’t survive the travel there on old 0.1 trades… We need full trade-lot size to be well fed for the boundaries.
personally i still think that big drawdown (from primers in one direction) is not handled by counter primers as they should,
what did your alerts say Sgude0?
EDIT: ooh, you wrote that already… need to read it all
and yes Frawan, we still need to have the lot size fixed when getting back to an area with smaller lot sizes to get a faster groth without just adding extra to the drawdown… but i dont think that that is the only problem
I agree that it isn’t the only problem. I am systematically testing various conditions and variables, noting starting amount, dates, output-reports etc. and will return with something tangible in a few days once I have run enough tests to give us an idea about where tweaking it helps.
I’m sure we can get the primers “right”, but will it be enough? I have a version of the EA that I’ve been tinckering with for a few weeks myself where the primers work pretty good (but are partly hardcoded, so for testing purposes only). I’ve run lots of simulations using lot increases as defined in the system dox and manually selected tick data (a 2000 pips range over 12 months). And though I get better results than most of what I’ve seen here so far, I can not yet see how the Greenlanding system can avoid running out of money, or how it can start with less than 3.000$ for 2000 pips. Failing to close primers in time leads to mutually assured destruction when opposing primers escalate the open units beyond all reason so that’s really important. But, (biggest-smallest)/3 doesn’t seem to give enough extra earnings to cover the drawdown even when they do seem to act properly (I still have some bugs to work out). There must be a piece we’re missing. Maybe something to do with margin that is such a given for a pro trader like Michael that it hasn’t occured to him to point it out to the rest of us?
Re
D