I guess instead of going for signal services i prefer reading news on investing.com, economies.com and bloomberg etc. The signal services are usually hard to guess and they might create a lot of confusions. I am trading with multiple brokers and although they provide some good bunch of news but i try to trade at my own conclusions derived from the said websites.
Is it okay to use forex signal services?
- Thread starter Henry Edith
- Start date
Never follow signal! Trade on your own! Why do you guys look for signals? That is the easiest way to lose you money! Do you want to lose your money? Then give just give it to me instead! Look man, I have tried all of these services, no one seemed good. Everyone has false claim about profit but they actually manipulate the results regularly. Only once I considered to join a site, Forexprofita.com. They seemed fair to me. But finally, I didn’t try. Because I have doubt that they are also showing false result of 80% winning rate. You can have a go with them and see if they can produce what they claim. Let me know the result please. If they can’t, never subscribe to any signal service again!
If you had reliably successful signals, would you sell them as a subscription service? 
The reason it's so difficult to find profitable trading signals is "selection bias".
It's relatively easy (given plenty of knowledge, understanding, judgment and due diligence!) to identify a signal service that has had a good few months of profit, but (and here's the point) it won't be the same one that's still making profits in a couple of months' time, and there are reasons for that, which aren't trivially easy for the uninitiated to understand.
There are thousands of signal services "out there" (and unfortunately quite a few of them "in here" as well!), and at any one time, out of those thousands, it follows that there will be a small number who happen, simply by the laws of chance, to have had a run of a few good months.
There's also a process at work which statisticians call "selection bias", which predicates that those few are usually the ones you see advertising and promoting and being recommended most prominently.
Unfortunately, the fact that they happen just to have a few good months has very little (or "no") bearing at all on their chances of having a good few months again when you subscribe, because they had it by luck and "because someone has to", not by skill. They're successful marketers, not successful traders.
That's the "hidden reason" why it's so very, very common to join a successful service and for it all to turn sour as soon as you start paying for it.
The reason it's so difficult to find profitable trading signals is "selection bias".
It's relatively easy (given plenty of knowledge, understanding, judgment and due diligence!) to identify a signal service that has had a good few months of profit, but (and here's the point) it won't be the same one that's still making profits in a couple of months' time, and there are reasons for that, which aren't trivially easy for the uninitiated to understand.
There are thousands of signal services "out there" (and unfortunately quite a few of them "in here" as well!), and at any one time, out of those thousands, it follows that there will be a small number who happen, simply by the laws of chance, to have had a run of a few good months.
There's also a process at work which statisticians call "selection bias", which predicates that those few are usually the ones you see advertising and promoting and being recommended most prominently.
Unfortunately, the fact that they happen just to have a few good months has very little (or "no") bearing at all on their chances of having a good few months again when you subscribe, because they had it by luck and "because someone has to", not by skill. They're successful marketers, not successful traders.
That's the "hidden reason" why it's so very, very common to join a successful service and for it all to turn sour as soon as you start paying for it.
This is total nonsense. It doesn't normally mean that at all.
It normally means that there's an affiliate scheme in place offering people (typically in third-world countries) an incentive to promote the "service", a huge turnover of members each of whom remains for a month or two or three until they realise it was probably a scam, and that for precisely the "selection bias" reason explained in the post above yours, that's just one of the "services" that's currently being most promoted at the moment. It's actually very highly likely to be a worse-than average "service", not a better-than-average one.
Really not bad, wait; why don't you wanna share?
I would not believe any profit claims unless they are providing at least 5 years of tax returns audited by a national firm. Most pro traders have a trade win rate of 40-50% on average and only the best of the best, a handful, have a long term ROR >40%. Now just try asking them for their tax records - chances are about 99% they blow you off. Lets see that make a zillion percent return, never lose, yet they need money from subscriptions - yea, right.
Last edited:
Yes it is ok to use a forex signal service but you have to take its signals with a VERY LARGE grain of salt.
You shouldn't take their claims of success or whatever profit track record that they post there at face value. Instead what I would do is first study the signal itself to figure out WHY it would generate potentially profitable signals and in which market condition(s) it's most successful/unprofitable. There is NO one signal that can be successful under ALL market conditions. You need to find out that signal's strength and weakness. If a signal is a genuinely profitable one, there has to be a reason WHY it's successful. Nothing exists in a vacuum. Second, I would demo trade it with the signal service myself to see how it fares out in the REAL trading environment. Don't take their word for it no matter how good it is. Trade as if you are trading for real, use the signal according the instructions of how it's supposed to be used, follow the instructions carefully and test it for a period of time not like just several days and observe how the signal works, whether it's profitable and how much is the average profit. Ideally you should test it for at least 6 months to see how profitable it is in NON-NEWS days unless the signal states that it will work fine even in the face of market-impacting news like the NFP numbers.
Only if that signal can withstand the test of time in a REAL trading environment and be CONSISTENTLY profitable with bona fide reasons, then and only then it's worth it for you to pay to subscribe to it, otherwise you are just wasting your money.
My personal opinion. Good luck!
Keep in mind guys that past performance doesn't guarantee future profits. Pay less attention to the overall gains rather at the consistency, winning/losing trades ratio, and how far signal provider let losing trades go (i.e. drawdown). Always remember he can start losing any time or enter a losing row of trades when you just jumped in, ready for cash flowing into your hands.
And second advice is split your investments between several successful providers with roughly same level of proficiency in trading based on the criterions I mentioned above.
Good luck.
And second advice is split your investments between several successful providers with roughly same level of proficiency in trading based on the criterions I mentioned above.
Good luck.