Keep us posted.
Anything is possible.
Proving naysayers wrong is my mission in life.
Anything is possible.
Proving naysayers wrong is my mission in life.
93.33% Accuracy and Better is Achievable with this Forex Strategy.
- Thread starter IAlwaysWin
- Start date
Definitely didn't forget about this thread. Still working on a few tweaks and after I go 100% auto, I'll be posting..
Are you working with a programmer or are you building out the system yourself? If the former, is the programmer someone you would or could recommend to others, or does this constitute information you and/or the other individual wish to keep private?
I have a partner that codes Meta language and I do some coding myself but mainly pine script.
You simply need to show pass investor for everone!
So, IAlwaysWin never went 100% auto? (Just asking...)
Not necessarily for OP, but given some respondents in this thread:
ExpectedProfit = SizeOfWin * Accuracy + SizeOfLoss * (1 - Accuracy); 0 < Accuracy < 1
What matters is ExpectedProfit > 0, not Accuracy ~ 1 (or Accuracy ~100% in percentages), which carries hidden tail risk where SizeOfLoss is gigantic.
If you don't understand this equation (or have an equivalent practical understanding/experience) you don't understand trading, period.
ExpectedProfit = SizeOfWin * Accuracy + SizeOfLoss * (1 - Accuracy); 0 < Accuracy < 1
What matters is ExpectedProfit > 0, not Accuracy ~ 1 (or Accuracy ~100% in percentages), which carries hidden tail risk where SizeOfLoss is gigantic.
If you don't understand this equation (or have an equivalent practical understanding/experience) you don't understand trading, period.
I find the largest issue with backtesting is that you need data points from all market environments, meaning you have to go back very far. Also, backtesting is always the idealized trade. Emotions do not occur in backtesting and confirmation bias can wreck havoc on results.
Have you found a way to counteract these factors?
IAlwaysWin typed "my plan with this thread is to test different markets and post the results here." But, I looked and looked and could not find where this ever occurred! Did the original poster abandon this plan, or am I simply suffering from selective blindness (which often turns out to be the case)?.