I have this EA that produce 99% backtest results from 2007 to current that are so amazing I have never seen before.(and its not grid/martingle)
Problem is I had to trim away a whole lot on this EA to make it so profitable and now it trades very infrequent +/-6 trades a month. I also had to minimize its tp to 2 pips.
Now it only pays traders with big $$$ to trade with it. The best I can get it with acceptable drawdown and $1000 is +/- $10 per month. Which is way too little. It only really starts to mean something when you trade with 50k. Here in South Africa that is over half a million rands, which isn’t possible to obtain without surety.
I also don’t want to sell the EA, because it will be educated and distributed amongst many. I am trying to market a myself as a signal provider, but who will want $10/$1000? Some that I provide signals to, I have told not to use this as a stand alone.
What am I to do?
Moderators, I am not using this as an advertising ploy, but really need advice, it might be in the wrong section, please move it if it is.
I forgot to mention. What makes it so hard to dismiss it (you might think, one wrong trade and all profits are wiped) for me is that it has 100% success rate on all trades, and it doesn’t cling onto a trade with the hopes of the market changing (the longest duration is 2 weeks and in 7 years there has been 4 such trades)
I would try applying at a site to be a signal provider and just be honest with people and tell them you believe its a safe system but for deep pockets. There are a lot of people with big money out there who are looking for a safe system and who are not trying to triple their money annually. You might be surprised to find that you actually start to get followers.
I have built similar system, here’s the thread: 301 Moved Permanently
It seems to be profitable, I haven’t done any reliable live testing…
There’s just one problem in these straight line ea’s: drawdown. Like in your report: If that 30% drawdown hit the sl, you would have to trade about 5(?) years to get back to profit… Nobody wants to take that risk.
Thank you for the reply and thanks for that thread shortcut. Interesting take on the whole subject. I have cut away some trading hours and days, to try and filter bad trades. In the +/- 7 years it hasn’t taken a bad trade. After reading your thread I tinkered with it a bit and changed the stop loss to a more “static” stop loss, now it shows it will be much more profitable - thanks, didn’t think of that, just used the classic trailing stop. I have gone live with this a couple of months ago and will carry on with it.
do you have any concerns about the 30%+ in drawdowns that the system incured… after all if you make about 1% a month based on the 10/1000 example, a 30% slide is almost 3 years worth of profits at risk… seems like a hard pill to swallow.
would you like to describe the system a bit more, like what is the theory behind it, and why are your take profits at 2pips…
also what happens when you have slippage, how bad would that hurt your profits if you get slipped .5 pips here and there.
To be honest, there doesn’t seem to be any real profitability in his ea. Look to the average profit and sl: 1.27 profit to 328 (at least) loss, that means profit trades are supposed to happen at least 258 times more usual than losses to even reach 0-profit.
Its great if we gave any new thoughts Remember to test it on demo account before moving to large sums of real money, that can be a disaster with any ea. (I know because I have had many disasters)
I have been heard a lot that EA´s looks usually great in Demo, but fails in Live, but i never heard any explanation for this. Can you explain how is it possible cause doesent Demo uses same price etc as Live.?
I don’t know any proved reason, but I think it has something to do with some minimal price differences between real and demo servers, and also spread may behave differently.
Seems like the demo/real results differ more when trades are exremely short-time ones (<30min).
After all, brokers can always “decide” their price data as there is no central database for all brokers. So its possible that broker keeps the demo data “simplier” than the real data.
An ea may be okay the day it is designed, but from that day forward changes in the market gradually erode the premis upon which it was designed, until it is rendered useless. There is a good thread here about Scion which seems to demonstrate this, a system getting great reviews in the beginning but no longer producing results
^True. Thats the reason you have to get reliable test results from long time: If a system works 10 years with max 30% DD, it is not very likely to fail 90% the next day, is it ?
Well, when 90% of investors are losing, 10% must be winning, with a good system. Also, there MUST be lots of losers in the market, the win money comes from losers…
Lets take a thought practice from stock world: Warren Buffet has made billions with his system, so it must be pretty good. Why isn’t everybody following his trades? Because nothing is certain, and (beginning) investors don’t know which systems are good and which just seem to be.
Don’t take me too seriously, im just thinking aloud
I heard the guy who wrote ‘Hedge Fund Market Wizards’ say one problem is that some traders do have winning systems, but they keep turning their systems off and on again when the system hits a rough patch because they lack confidence in their system. The end result is poor performance from a system that would have worked fine if the trader had left it alone and let the system run.
Remember to test it on demo account before moving to large sums of real money, that can be a disaster with any ea. (I know because I have had many disasters)
