This stuff is a big waste of time...there are too many profitable methods on here to be looking or even posting about this..

I almost 400 post...I thought it was something good...but of course it's not... these results are laughable

' Now plug in your position size and work out how much a 2,000 pip loss is. If that's acceptable to you for 100 pip gain, I don't know what else to say.'

I hear what your saying over all it's good ...but I don't agree with the statement above..

no matter what trading system you use manual or automatic, there is always the risk of loss... and that is just that..

it's the cost of doing business...lol
 

Earl posted:
    ' Now plug in your position size and work out how much a 2,000 pip loss is. If that's acceptable to you for 100 pip gain, I don't know what else to say.'

I hear what your saying over all it's good ...but I don't agree with the statement above..

no matter what trading system you use manual or automatic, there is always the risk of loss... and that is just that..

it's the cost of doing business...lol
 



Risk of loss, exactly! That's how I evaluate systems. Risk first , then profit potential. A lot of people make the mistake of looking at profit potential first, and giving risk an after thought. As far as not agreeing, there's really nothing to agree/disagree about. The fact is that HiRider places Stop Losses (actual risk) and Take Profits (Potential Profit). These numbers break down into a Risk to Reward ratio which is either acceptable or not. Below are the S/L & T/P of all HiRider Strategies:

S1: S/L= 100 ; T/P= 7 RR= 14.3 : 1
S2: S/L= 210 ; T/P= 12 RR= 17.5 : 1
S3: S/L= 210 ; T/P= 12 RR= 17.5 : 1
S4: S/L= 210 ; T/P= 12 RR= 17.5 : 1
S5: S/L= 210 ; T/P= 10 RR= 21 : 1


Now, the fact that HiRider can open 10 separate positions using the same strategy at the very close time intervals (AKA the same entry signal opening multiple orders instead of one) magnifies profit potential AND risk. So if the maximum positions (10) were opened using the same strategy with a stop loss at 210 pips the total risk is 2,100 pips. Where's the disagreement?

These are the numbers of HiRider unless the user modifies them via Fusion. I would be perfectly fine risking 2,100 pips if profit potential was 4,200 pips or better however that is not the case with HiRider. The profit potential is at best 120 pips over 10 trades. 2,100 pip risk for 120 pip potential is not the cost of doing business, it's a guaranteed business killer. Would you put $21,000 at risk for a potential profit of $1,200? I sure wouldn't... and I definitely wouldn't do it consistently.

20 risk to 1 profit is not acceptable to me. I prefer 1:2 or better, and 1:1 minimum. In some cases I might accept an inverted RR if the strategy performs exceptionally well in specific market conditions, and is only traded during those conditions.

Yes, risk of loss is part of the game. But brushing it aside and not comparing it to profit potential is very silly. Would you bet on a series of 100 coin tosses where you risked $20 to make $10 per toss? How about if you risked $10 to make $20? One is a statistically guaranteed loss, while the other is a statistically guaranteed win. Both involve risk but the risk is not worth the potential in the first series, while the risk is definitely worth the potential for the second series.

Surely, you can't believe that one system with more risk and less profit potential, is equal to another system with less risk and more profit potential....

The basic utility of a system can be measured using Risk vs Profit Potential in relation to the probability of success (win%).

Money Management is not the same as Risk Management.

Risk management is simply managing risk. (e.g. Identifying your maximum risk) So, basically position sizing with relation to the maximum acceptable movement of price in the direction that you don't want it to go. Also, any trading time restrictions, or currency pair restrictions due to high spread, negative roll, volatility, liquidity, etc.

Ex1: If I want to risk 1% of a $100k account and my stop is placed at 100 pips on a pair with a pip cost of $10 I could risk 1 standard lot, 10 minis, or a volume of $100k.

Ex2: If my stop was at 50 pips and pip cost was $10 for the pair then I could risk 2 standard lots, 20 minis, or a volume of $200k

For both examples the risk is $1,000 or 1% of the $100k account. Depending on RR the profit potential would vary.

Money Management brings into play: position scaling, max % of equity to be used, Risk vs Reward, and other methods such as suspending trading during a heavy losing streak.

Risk management can exist without money management, and money management can exist without risk management. Although they may seem similar, they are definitely not the same thing.

Yes, even with good money management things can go against you... This is the reason to have good RISK management.

I've watched many trades go bad. The tricky part is letting the bad trades go bad (or preserving profits), and letting the good trades reach their maximum potential as set by your system. (AKA cutting losses, and letting profits run)

Forex is chaotic, yes. But, it is not entirely chaos. It appears more chaotic as you look at smaller market cycles and then even more chaotic when looking at sheer volatility(e.g. scalping from a 1 minute chart vs. position trading vs. holding carry trades)

Knowing Risk in Relation to reward and analyzing it relative to a systems average win % will work wonders. Yes, it is speculation. For some, it's gambling. The only tools you can really bring to the table is your RR & MM strategies and the fortitude to abide by them.

A person could just as easily run around buying and selling houses without regard for their exposure in terms of risk. That can work when the markets go up, but ask the many people who lost small fortunes when the real estate bubble burst.... Then ask the people who are still investing in real estate. The difference is calculated decision making (AKA investing) vs overexcited buying and selling (AKA gambling).

Everything is not so simple, and yet, everything is so simple... Kind of strange...

 

I see a lot of bitchin' and moanin' here :-(

To Steve's point above we are wired for success and not failure so I can understand with some of the initial published account results and people's one or two demo / live account results why that might be.

But - In poker, you play the hand your dealt or you fold - and this watershed will occur soon
(Look on the bright side, at least here with a fold strategy you have the chance of a refund if you followed FRWC guidelines :-)

For those still in after the refund period expires, forget about the profitability, that will take care of itself when we figure out either a pattern in the losing trades (common currency loss, time of day loss, breach of max loss value for all winning trades) or a way to mitigate them i.e. Trade Manager EA's - I won't say the answer is staring us in the face, but it is out there.

I've seen the posts here, and there are smart FOREX traders in this forum, if there was as much energy spent researching the above or similar risk mitigation options to close down that big 1:15 or 1:20 losing trade instead of whining about not having received a money printing press for your $1000 we all might have been able to make some money by now - my challenge to all of you with half a brain, roll up your sleeves and help figure this out and we'll all be better off !!! :-)


On the subject of what we bought into here, there is a lot of people her calling it junk, your entitled to your opinion, their like @$$holes - everyone has one, and your entitled to.

Let me get naked and expose mine -

I bought into an experiment with a lot of promise and no guarantees. I rolled the dice with high expectations but under no illusion this was my retirement plan.

What actually happened?

FRWC made available all top EA's 'as is' in their RAW competition format, they also took 5 very different EA's written by 5 very different programmers from all over the world - one even used a code generator because they couldn't write the EA themself.

The RAW EA's were likely optimized for max risk vs reward - why wouldn't you go for it flat out in what was basically a 100m sprint where winner takes all !

These EA's were made available with pretty poor documentation and instruction (Mistake on FWRC's part, highlighted by our results straight out the box based on their minimal explanation & guidance).

They also took 5 very different robots and either merged or took their principle logic and re-wrote and tested (somewhat in the timeframe) one new hybrid robot called Fusion V in a very short period of time. I might not be a FOREX expert but I've been in IT since 1988, and for anybody who has written and developed software / EA's, you know this in no mean feet in the time they had, and this introduces the potential to have bugs, any one of which could bust an account in this environment as we have seen.

They then released all of this to the public for a $1000 fee with slick marketing.

Had the results been good post world cup in the demo / live environment, none of us would be moaning, but that's not the way it went down, and I suspect FRWC were not prepared or staffed properly for this. They have tried to address the issues but are likely only just getting to grips with what really needs to be done both from a Customer Relations perspective and from a development & release perspective - we have seen a few emails on guidance & some updates and improvements to some of the robots which would indicate this but they still have a long way to go.

There are now some questions over credibility, with under performance, accusations of manually closed trades and bad PR around refunds.

Looking to the future, those that can't take the $1000 loss should consider seeking a refund so start collecting your data for FRWC per the money back offer & MadMatz guidance above if need be.

Those that can take the temporary loss and ride it out till the Robots are refined enough to make money, need to consider their role during this period, do you sit back and wait, or if you have knowledge in any aspect of solving the issue of effective loss mitigation need to start posting and collaborating - this is what separates us from the animal's boys and girls our ability to think, work together learn and solve complex problems.

Remember - most of the top robots here know when to place trades and make money, it's the potentially for busting per Steve above that is killing them IMO that's the focus that's needed, we can worry about enhancing profitability later.

My cup is half full and aas you may be able to tell, I do have faith in FRWC I believe they are honest to their intentions, it's just going to take some time - disappointing per their marketing material / hype, but ask yourself this, can you manually trade the gross profit numbers better yourself ? and if not, what are you going to do about it ?

K

PS - To FRWC if you read this forum - great concept and marketing, lots of potential, now get your sh*# together, there are a lot of people expecting you to deliver here per your commitments, or come good on your money back guarantee - your future success & reputation depends on it !