To use chat, please login.
Back to contacts

FX Cure EA (TEA Free)

Drew (ForexCure)
Oct 06 2013 at 19:13
147 posts
I want this to be the new thread for those testing my new EA as discussed here:,130#?pt=2&p=129&o=161170

The beta version 0.9 is only $15 and does not require Tom's EA to run.

It is a stand alone automatic EA described in the attachement...



Waant aal, lose aal, man...
Drew (ForexCure)
Oct 07 2013 at 06:06
147 posts
The link to my FX Cure demo is:

I started with $50K on IamFX with multiplier_filter set to 1. After a couple weeks I increased
the Risk from 1 to 2. So, all 1X orders are blocked. All 3X orders are approx. 0.30 lots now.

Waant aal, lose aal, man...
Oct 07 2013 at 06:52
51 posts
Thank you Drew. Looking forward to the discussion.

Oct 07 2013 at 09:32
62 posts
Hi All, Congrats for this new thread.

Couple of questions to start up better :
- Can I start directly with multiplier_filter = 3 ?
- I've seen in your demo account that your min lot size is 0.15. Is that when you started with multiplier_filter = 1 ?
- About pairs, I've seen that you've picked many pairs and ones that are trending pretty well, which is the opposite of the strategy we used to apply to marti/grid EA's. Do you think that, indeed, with this new approach, trending pairs will work best ?

Take care,


Drew (ForexCure)
Oct 07 2013 at 12:37
147 posts
David. Of course you can start with multiplier_filter = 3.

Since this blocks all 1X and 3X orders, you might not see
ANY orders appear before at least 3 days.

No, pairs that trend for too long lead to large drawdowns
and eventual stop out.

That was the design in Tom's EA - when any trade went
-600 pips in the opposite direction, it is closed. And most
of those occurrences are with 1X orders. It does happen
on 3X and 6X and 9X trades, but much, much less often.

This code is too new for this to have occurred yet. That's
a major reason for me trading all 28 major/minor pairs - to
observe this behavior and how it's handled in a forward test.

Somebody asked about if they can backtest this EA. YES!
Please do. I have tried until my fingers and brain bleed but
can never get over 25% accuracy on those back-test.
But figuring that out is another thread somewhere else.

My take on trending pairs is not so much the trend, but the
lack of pullback because we are counter-trending and depend
on a healthy pullback to close our baskets. That said be afraid
of any minors using NZD and JPY. I promise you will eventually
lose money on those - unless you have a TON of Equity.
They have been known for some epic trends, before eventual
pullback - even Months later.

I hope this helps.


Waant aal, lose aal, man...
Oct 07 2013 at 16:08
62 posts
Thanks for your answer.

I see what you meant with too much trending pairs. I'll follow your advise.

Couple of questions for you :
- Have you integrated some hard-coded stoploss (like 600pips on Tom's EA) ?
- Can you confirm that there won't be any liquidation of the positions or that the EA won't stop taking positions until the broker prevent it ?

- Being able to backtest your EA would be very interesting. Tom's EA wasn't backtestable for what I (think to) know and according to developper (as per his forum intervention) because of use of other TF (5mn 60mn) at some points.
Therefore, the only way to know if your code if backtestable would be to know if your code includes use of this statement :
iMACD(NULL, Timeframe ....) where timeframe would be different than the current timeframe (M1).

Thanks, Regards,

- David

Oct 07 2013 at 16:15
62 posts
I've just seen these 2 orders closed today on your forward's test link :
- GBPJPY Buy 0.30 - 1.20 156.15000 156.16000 1.0 1.20 2d 0.00%
- GBPJPY Buy 0.15 - 154.80 157.71000 156.16000 -155.0 -240.50 5d -0.46%

Total basket closed is negative.
Did you close that manually or the EA did it ?

If the EA did it, that would mean the closing point is equal to the one that would be used if x1 / x2 / x3 were present.
But because they are not present, the orders opened are not hedged and we close the basket on negative P/L.

What about that aspect ? Did you work on it when designing your EA ?
1) Did you choose the loss vs the stopout ?
2) Did you mean to have a positive basket closing and there is a programming mistake ?

Thanks, Regards,

- David

Drew (ForexCure)
Oct 07 2013 at 21:51
147 posts
David. I will have my programmer look into that as well as some
other curious closes, certainly. But it make take a day or two...

He responded to your second-last question about -600pip stoploss.
Unfortunately, English is not his first language, so I'll have to read
his (really long) response many times and contact him again.
Eventually, I'll get the answer.

Hey, I did say this was v0.9 ;) ...


Waant aal, lose aal, man...
Drew (ForexCure)
Oct 07 2013 at 22:10
147 posts
Got it David. That GBP/JPY loss today was due to my changing the multiplier from 1 to 2.
The Oct. 2 order was with setting '1', but was still open when I changed the setting to '2'
So, the next GBP/JPY opened (they (baskets) are tracked internally by Magic Number)
in the same baske, and the calculations got screwed up. (I know not very technical)

So, we find our first Rule now....

-->1. Don't change the multiplier_filter setting when there are still open orders (!)

I'm not saying it will result in a loss everytime, but I just showed that it can...


Waant aal, lose aal, man...
Drew (ForexCure)
Oct 07 2013 at 22:16
147 posts
Also,David, to your earlier question...about Backtesting. Yes, there are
several lines of variable assignments containing language such as:

double macd1 = iMACD(NULL, MACD_TF,.....) so I guess the code is
testing different timeframes to check for an entry point - and will not
work in a back test. Is that what you where saying?


Waant aal, lose aal, man...
Please login to comment .