I want only a safe 4% each month... Which EA?? Thank you

I have another question, that ea is a 'tradecopier' ??.

optimofx posted:
I wonder if u do a Backtest of 10 years old + 6 months Demo + 4 months of Real , them for how many time u do ur Optimization ?.
I think that u are confused in some terms. Or maybe u get that system optimized, them u dont do a Fordward test before put in demo?
I think u confused Backtest with Optimization, and are not the same.
GL.

https://www.myfxbook.com/members/optimofx

Just to clarify: a strategy was backtested and yes, optimized, followed by a 6 months forward test in demo to validate it. Since the 6 months demo test gave the same results as the backtests, a live forward test was started 4 months ago, which performed the same as the optimized backtest AND the 6 months demo forward test.

optimofx posted:
I have another question, that ea is a 'tradecopier' ??.

What do you mean?

FxMasterGuru posted:

optimofx posted:
I wonder if u do a Backtest of 10 years old + 6 months Demo + 4 months of Real , them for how many time u do ur Optimization ?.
I think that u are confused in some terms. Or maybe u get that system optimized, them u dont do a Fordward test before put in demo?
I think u confused Backtest with Optimization, and are not the same.
GL.

https://www.myfxbook.com/members/optimofx

Just to clarify: a strategy was backtested and yes, optimized, followed by a 6 months forward test in demo to validate it. Since the 6 months demo test gave the same results as the backtests, a live forward test was started 4 months ago, which performed the same as the optimized backtest AND the 6 months demo forward test.

FxMasterGuru ...
Go ahead ... you did the right thing. 4 and 6 months live and demo accounts are more than enough for me to have an idea for how is the account is going.
Well done!
O. Shaban

Just that , is an 'automated strategy' or just a 'tradecopier', an ea that only received signal for a provider, many people talk about 'tradecopier' as 'automated strategy' but is not the same.

optimofx posted:
Just that , is an 'automated strategy' or just a 'tradecopier', an ea that only received signal for a provider, many people talk about 'tradecopier' as 'automated strategy' but is not the same.

Thanks for the clarification. It is a self-made EA. I am running a Morningstar II EA also, which has a lower risk setting than Morningstar I.

Morningstar I: 0.1 lot per 1000 USD
Morningstar II: 0.07 lot per 1000 USD

Which is the risk u mencioned? 2% , 1% ?
That ea is that one is selling by 29 $ in the web?
It looks promisin but i cant make a veredict, without invest the ea. Good work anyway and GL.

Thanks! This EA is not sold (and will not be sold) anywhere.

Risk setting parameters are actually the leverages which are used. MS I uses a 1:10 leverage, while MS II uses a 1:7 leverage. We consider using higher than 1:10 leverage too risky with any kind of Fx strategy.

Man u talk about ratio, but i wonder about risk. How many is the amount a looser trade means in ur account ¿¿ 1% , 2% ....that's the risk.

Well when u talk about leverage, i thought u talk about ratio, BUT , what leverage have to do with Risk ? leverage has nothing to do with risk. Thats's the reason i couldn't trust in ur system, i wonder about risk but u cant answer me because u dont know whats risk.
Leverage dont determine ur risk (only more leverage u CAN be more riskly). Risk is the higher looser a trade can do in ur balance. Risk is determined by ur Stop Loss, ur lots of entrance and ur actual balance.
Please clarify ur concepts.

Here is the answare for the original question:
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/Anmaric_LTD/rhov13/482225

optimofx posted:
Well when u talk about leverage, i thought u talk about ratio, BUT , what leverage have to do with Risk ? leverage has nothing to do with risk. Thats's the reason i couldn't trust in ur system, i wonder about risk but u cant answer me because u dont know whats risk.
Leverage dont determine ur risk (only more leverage u CAN be more riskly). Risk is the higher looser a trade can do in ur balance. Risk is determined by ur Stop Loss, ur lots of entrance and ur actual balance.
Please clarify ur concepts.

Your response makes no clear distinction between ABSOLUTE (INTRINSIC) and RELATIVE (EXTRINSIC) risks, and without this distinction I understand that my previous statement might be confusing.

The ABSOLUTE RISK can be determined best by the average loss per trade (in pips) and the historically worst loss (in pips). In other words what to expect in regards to PIP losses (average and worst). This ABSOLUTE risk is determined by the interaction of the algorithm and the market. Since these 'risk values' are in the MyFxBook's statistics, I don't need to comment on them.

What I was referring to was the RELATIVE risk of the two published strategies. Relative risk is in very close relationship with the used LEVERAGE (not to be confused by the available leverage) which determined by the size of your account and the traded number of LOTS. Increasing your leverage increases your risk with the same exact EA, isn't it?

To sum it up: The risk of any strategy is the combination of the INTRINSIC risk of the strategy itself and the EXTRINSIC risk of the leverage used (which is the decision of the individual trader). The risk setting I had mentioned before refers to this EXTRINSIC risk setting, i.e. the used leverage.

Fx Market Guru says : Increasing your leverage increases your risk with the same exact EA, isn't it?
I repeat u , more leverage, more u can riskly , more lots u can trade, them more leverage not increases ur risk, only u can increase ur risk if u want. Leverage dont determine ur risk. Of course i wondering u about absolute risk, u says ' Since these 'risk values' are in the MyFxBook's statistics, I don't need to comment on them ', but, who wanna a trading without knowing hoy many money or percent balance value can i loss in one trade? i think that noone.

Anmaric that seems good :) Risk per trade ?

I haven't strictly followed the discussion, but I would strongly argue that higher leverage = higher risk. One the top reasons anyone blows up is because they're risking too much on one trade. Or a black swan happens and you're overleveraged. Etc.

5x leverage, imo, is the most one needs for proper trading (no leverage is even better!). If you feel the need for more than that, then you're likely undercapitalized and a string of losses will seriously hurt you.

optimofx posted:
Fx Market Guru says : Increasing your leverage increases your risk with the same exact EA, isn't it?
I repeat u , more leverage, more u can riskly , more lots u can trade, them more leverage not increases ur risk, only u can increase ur risk if u want. Leverage dont determine ur risk. Of course i wondering u about absolute risk, u says ' Since these 'risk values' are in the MyFxBook's statistics, I don't need to comment on them ', but, who wanna a trading without knowing hoy many money or percent balance value can i loss in one trade? i think that noone.

I disagree with you OptimoFx. If you trade more lots with the same capital (i.e. you are using higher leverage) then your PERCENTAGE risk goes up. For example: the Master Account uses 1 minilot per 1000 USD, so 20 pips loss means approx. 2% loss on EUR/USD. Should we trade 2 minilots per 1000 USD, then the same exact 20 pips loss would result in 4% loss. In other words doubling the leverage would double the PERCENTAGE risk of the same 20 pips loss.

The absolute (intrinsic) risk of the strategy is reflected by the average loss, max. loss and max. DD. This strategy's stop loss is a dynamic and self-adjusting value based on market range and volatility, so I cannot give you one number as the stop loss. Historical stop loss values (in pips!) tell what to expect in different market situations. If you are interested I can dig up max. loss values from the backtests, however the max. DD has never exceeded 25% in backtests. As mentioned, the strategy has survided the flash crash of May 2010 (in backtest) and came out with profit from it.

We all know that Forex is 'controlled' gambling and only brokers and people which run platform for trading make serious EASY money without any risk - all others loose money (more or less depending of experience)

The only way to make serious money and honest money on the web is building small automatic mini websites which each earn about $1/day from ads

If you build 100 websites (it can be done in 30 days even if you are newbie) you have EASY PASSIVE $100/day for year after few months when your site start receiving traffic from Google, MSN and Yahoo.

If you want more make 1000 websites - see attached screens as a proof how much a day you can make using this VERY simple but powerful method

As you can see it's possible to get over $19.000/day and over $1000/day is no problem at all!

Look at the country list - anybody can do it!

This is not a spam - I don't post any external links - 'JUST' honest answer for serious question

https://www.myfxbook.com/members/harisyes11/haris-munandar/489822

i want to share my system of trade manually😄

beoswind posted:
We all know that Forex is 'controlled' gambling and only brokers and people which run platform for trading make serious EASY money without any risk - all others loose money (more or less depending of experience)

The only way to make serious money and honest money on the web is building small automatic mini websites which each earn about $1/day from ads

If you build 100 websites (it can be done in 30 days even if you are newbie) you have EASY PASSIVE $100/day for year after few months when your site start receiving traffic from Google, MSN and Yahoo.

If you want more make 1000 websites - see attached screens as a proof how much a day you can make using this VERY simple but powerful method

As you can see it's possible to get over $19.000/day and over $1000/day is no problem at all!

Look at the country list - anybody can do it!

This is not a spam - I don't post any external links - 'JUST' honest answer for serious question

Finally someone has come to understand forex lol... like I been saying