チャットを利用するには、ログインしてください。
連絡先に戻る

Wolfe Wave Forex Robot (による Borys Fesenko )

そのユーザーはこのシステムを削除しました。

Wolfe Wave Forex Robot 討論

SandyW
May 06 2012 at 10:47
11 投稿
I have only recently acquired WW EA. I bought it, despite the fact that it is relatively expensive for a retail EA, as the equity curve displayed here on myfxbook is so straight and the draw down appears so modest. I did not appreciate that what people on here are calling martingale was such an important feature. The term martingale covers many ways of trying to overcome losses by increasing risk. Although this EA does not use classic martingale, ie waiting for a loss before multiplying the next trade size, it does use the same principle of using larger lot sizes to overcome a losing position. Sometimes called averaging down in investing circles, it is usually considered unwise. Borys is saying his EA does not use martinagle, and that it just adds to a losing position. But that is effectively a martingale strategy, adding additional risk to a losing position in the hope of a turn around in fortune. Now over the years, like many traders (and yes gamblers) I have been intrigued by the martingale theory, but to cut a long story short I have come to the conclusion that in the end using martingale will kill an account. In my view any trading strategy that depends on martingale is gambling and is disastrous.

So, having demonstrated to my own satisfaction (or should I say disappointment?), in back tests that the default settings of the EA will kill an account, I have been back testing using a max trades setting of two, multiplying the second trade size by two. I still could not get steady results on 15min 1hr 4hr TFs. However on the daily TF results were much steadier. I have also back tested using just one trade and not adding positions; this works well but adding that one extra position at double size seems to be better.

I also find that currency pairs which trend strongly eg eurused, audusd and eurjpy are not a good bet and can lead to very large and uncomfortable draw downs while a trade is open. Frankly I find it hard to see how Borys got the back tests results he is claiming, and I do not believe the nice straight equity curve on the live account can be sustained.

Unfortunately the user of this EA is left pretty much on his own as the manual is little more than a list of settings, with no detailed explanations of them offered. I have already fired up WW EA on a live account using all pairs and default settings, and will probably persevere with the live trading, but change to a daily TF and less risky settings. And I will cut out the trending pairs. I have to say that although the simple explanations of Wolfe Wave in the sales blurb were very beguiling, no caution has been offered by the developer Borys (who is obviously a sharp cookie in the best sense) as to the risks this EA poses. Borys says it is not martingale, well maybe not classic martingale, but the risk is exactly equivalent, just as in Forex Hacked EA.

It must be said (sorry Borys) but this EA does stand alongside Forex Hacked EA, in terms of what it promises but also in terms of the risks it poses. Had I known what I know now I would never have bought WW EA, sorry.

The EA does use WW as a way to determine when to open a trade, but WW application ends there as far as I can see. The TP and SL methodologies have no connection with WW theory as expounded on BJF sales website. I can open a trade using any number of entry methods, but it is how a trade is managed that makes it profitable, and I am yet to be convinced by this EA in that regard.

Borys, you need to offer far more information up front. No matter how good your 'support' is, the up front advice and information is very important even to experienced traders and EA users. Your EAs are all expensive, and they need to offer better value to users.

Matt (BluePanther)
May 06 2012 at 11:20
1356 投稿
Thanks for your input Sandy. Wow you certainly know what you are talking about, but you have no systems shared on myfxbook.

Could you share some systems you are running - including this ea on a live account using your settings?
Could you write a critique of some other eas - namely, megadroid, wallstreet, forexgrowthbot, gpsforexrobot, kangaroo ea, milliondollarpips, fastforexmillions, fapturbo, euronis, crescendo, forexsteam, and thor? (basically all the eas I have tried and/or currently am trying).

Regards,
SandyW
May 06 2012 at 12:39
11 投稿

BluePanther,

If and when I get some consistent results I may post them up, but so far my live results with WW EA would tell you nothing.

I have only offered my thoughts to date, and am rather hoping that it will encourage Borys to give his customers more help. Borys strikes me as being pretty bright as a programmer and salesman, but I am not so sure he is a successful trader. Not so sure I am either as I have had very mixed results over the years, and all my own EAs have been similar to the commercial ones, profitable at times and losing at times. It is my own experience of trying to convert bad strategies into profitable strategies that has made me very wary of martingale. I don't usually comment much on commercial EAs, but felt I should this time. If only in the hope of getting more information out of users on its workings, rather than a few cryptic or glib comments which don't really help. It would certainly be helpful if we were given better insight into the workings of the EA by Borys, and not be just left to sort ourselves out.

As for for your kind invitation for my comment on every EA under the sun, I will decline. Like you I have certainly tried 'a few', (and am well known to Clickbank!) and if I had found a good 'un I would say so! I made really good money with my first four commercial EAs. Converted £100 into £6400 in three weeks flat! Then guess what, the market changed and it all went back down the tubes in one afternoon while I was out, or would have if I hadn't pulled the plug when I got back saving just £1400.

I made really good money with fapturbo over the first 6 months it was in the market, then the brokers did something and the market changed; I was an early adopter and then probably one of the first to dump it. I see they are pushing it again, so am mulling over a restart using the latest version. I have not been inspired enough by the others you list to try them. I traded megadroid live, but decided I didn't like the deep SL and quit while I was ahead.

And finally, although I have banged on a bit about WW EA, I am not about to set myself up as an expert or a reviewer. Nor would I market any of my own EAs, there are enough scams out there put out by cleverer people than me!!!

BTW, nothing would make me happier than for someone to be able to guarantee that by trading WW EA on default settings I would make steady money with no significant risk of blowing my account.

This is all rather off topic really. Let's see what others can contribute as regards WW EA.
ForexScam
May 06 2012 at 13:22
1008 投稿

   SandyW posted:
   I have only recently acquired WW EA. I bought it, despite the fact that it is relatively expensive for a retail EA, as the equity curve displayed here on myfxbook is so straight and the draw down appears so modest. I did not appreciate that what people on here are calling martingale was such an important feature. The term martingale covers many ways of trying to overcome losses by increasing risk. Although this EA does not use classic martingale, ie waiting for a loss before multiplying the next trade size, it does use the same principle of using larger lot sizes to overcome a losing position. Sometimes called averaging down in investing circles, it is usually considered unwise. Borys is saying his EA does not use martinagle, and that it just adds to a losing position. But that is effectively a martingale strategy, adding additional risk to a losing position in the hope of a turn around in fortune. Now over the years, like many traders (and yes gamblers) I have been intrigued by the martingale theory, but to cut a long story short I have come to the conclusion that in the end using martingale will kill an account. In my view any trading strategy that depends on martingale is gambling and is disastrous.

So, having demonstrated to my own satisfaction (or should I say disappointment?), in back tests that the default settings of the EA will kill an account, I have been back testing using a max trades setting of two, multiplying the second trade size by two. I still could not get steady results on 15min 1hr 4hr TFs. However on the daily TF results were much steadier. I have also back tested using just one trade and not adding positions; this works well but adding that one extra position at double size seems to be better.

I also find that currency pairs which trend strongly eg eurused, audusd and eurjpy are not a good bet and can lead to very large and uncomfortable draw downs while a trade is open. Frankly I find it hard to see how Borys got the back tests results he is claiming, and I do not believe the nice straight equity curve on the live account can be sustained.

Unfortunately the user of this EA is left pretty much on his own as the manual is little more than a list of settings, with no detailed explanations of them offered. I have already fired up WW EA on a live account using all pairs and default settings, and will probably persevere with the live trading, but change to a daily TF and less risky settings. And I will cut out the trending pairs. I have to say that although the simple explanations of Wolfe Wave in the sales blurb were very beguiling, no caution has been offered by the developer Borys (who is obviously a sharp cookie in the best sense) as to the risks this EA poses. Borys says it is not martingale, well maybe not classic martingale, but the risk is exactly equivalent, just as in Forex Hacked EA.

It must be said (sorry Borys) but this EA does stand alongside Forex Hacked EA, in terms of what it promises but also in terms of the risks it poses. Had I known what I know now I would never have bought WW EA, sorry.

The EA does use WW as a way to determine when to open a trade, but WW application ends there as far as I can see. The TP and SL methodologies have no connection with WW theory as expounded on BJF sales website. I can open a trade using any number of entry methods, but it is how a trade is managed that makes it profitable, and I am yet to be convinced by this EA in that regard.

Borys, you need to offer far more information up front. No matter how good your 'support' is, the up front advice and information is very important even to experienced traders and EA users. Your EAs are all expensive, and they need to offer better value to users.



Well said. After a glance at the money management strategy I hoped someone would test this system with out it and see if its still stable. If it relies on this MM strategy, the actual entry/exit r/r isn't stable enough for the future and surely not worth the price tag.
SandyW
May 06 2012 at 14:23
11 投稿
ForexScam

However Borys cares to wriggle out from the martingale 'accusation', this strategy is effectively martingale, and with martingale there is no meaningful SL: you have to hold your breath and stay aboard for the ride. Denying the martingale risk makes this EA a marginal scam.

No one who knows anything about trading and who can see how the EA works could relax with it on the default settings. Even if they were consistently profitable (as they appear to have been for the three months displayed on here) there would always be heart stopping draw downs to contend with, and a wipe out always just round the corner. This sort of situation does not allow the trader to cut his losses in a comfortable way as, by the time you decide to pull the plug, it is too late. From my limited back tests, and at the risk of repeating myself, this EA could only be worth using if it can be traded profitably using only one open position. Although iit appears a second may be worthwhile, in which case opening a very small initial position followed by one larger position (at a better price) would probably be the way to go. There can be no question that to allow the EA to open a whole series of increasingly large positions as each successive position moves into draw down courts disaster. My back tests show there is actually significant draw down to contend with even if opening only one position.

I still need to learn more about some of the subtleties of the settings, but the underlying risk is screaming out at me.


jsantos3
May 06 2012 at 20:14
272 投稿
Just a heads-up for the person who mentioned ForexSteam: This ea is a scam. I have documented case of bad trade deletion. It uses mt4live, which is easy to upload manipulated statement. I also have documented case of Fapturbo manipulation.
smarthedging
May 06 2012 at 20:46
5 投稿

   SandyW posted:
   I have only recently acquired WW EA. I bought it, despite the fact that it is relatively expensive for a retail EA, as the equity curve displayed here on myfxbook is so straight and the draw down appears so modest. I did not appreciate that what people on here are calling martingale was such an important feature. The term martingale covers many ways of trying to overcome losses by increasing risk. Although this EA does not use classic martingale, ie waiting for a loss before multiplying the next trade size, it does use the same principle of using larger lot sizes to overcome a losing position. Sometimes called averaging down in investing circles, it is usually considered unwise. Borys is saying his EA does not use martinagle, and that it just adds to a losing position. But that is effectively a martingale strategy, adding additional risk to a losing position in the hope of a turn around in fortune. Now over the years, like many traders (and yes gamblers) I have been intrigued by the martingale theory, but to cut a long story short I have come to the conclusion that in the end using martingale will kill an account. In my view any trading strategy that depends on martingale is gambling and is disastrous.

So, having demonstrated to my own satisfaction (or should I say disappointment?), in back tests that the default settings of the EA will kill an account, I have been back testing using a max trades setting of two, multiplying the second trade size by two. I still could not get steady results on 15min 1hr 4hr TFs. However on the daily TF results were much steadier. I have also back tested using just one trade and not adding positions; this works well but adding that one extra position at double size seems to be better.

I also find that currency pairs which trend strongly eg eurused, audusd and eurjpy are not a good bet and can lead to very large and uncomfortable draw downs while a trade is open. Frankly I find it hard to see how Borys got the back tests results he is claiming, and I do not believe the nice straight equity curve on the live account can be sustained.

Unfortunately the user of this EA is left pretty much on his own as the manual is little more than a list of settings, with no detailed explanations of them offered. I have already fired up WW EA on a live account using all pairs and default settings, and will probably persevere with the live trading, but change to a daily TF and less risky settings. And I will cut out the trending pairs. I have to say that although the simple explanations of Wolfe Wave in the sales blurb were very beguiling, no caution has been offered by the developer Borys (who is obviously a sharp cookie in the best sense) as to the risks this EA poses. Borys says it is not martingale, well maybe not classic martingale, but the risk is exactly equivalent, just as in Forex Hacked EA.

It must be said (sorry Borys) but this EA does stand alongside Forex Hacked EA, in terms of what it promises but also in terms of the risks it poses. Had I known what I know now I would never have bought WW EA, sorry.

The EA does use WW as a way to determine when to open a trade, but WW application ends there as far as I can see. The TP and SL methodologies have no connection with WW theory as expounded on BJF sales website. I can open a trade using any number of entry methods, but it is how a trade is managed that makes it profitable, and I am yet to be convinced by this EA in that regard.

Borys, you need to offer far more information up front. No matter how good your 'support' is, the up front advice and information is very important even to experienced traders and EA users. Your EAs are all expensive, and they need to offer better value to users.



Hey Sandy,
it's by far the best review i ever red about EA, wonderful Job,
i wonder why didn't you asked Demo version and BT with it,
also i was wondering if your BT was with 99% tick data?
i'm joining to Blue Panther request, i really would like to hear you opinion on other EA's,
after 6 years in Forex i think the most consist profit can made by Manual Trading(yes i'm still testing 4-5 EA's A week and disappointed)
Thank you again
SH



rs92
May 07 2012 at 08:17
15 投稿
The last night the EA isuffered a huge DD which has been hidden by the author, likely disconnecting his account from Myfxbook. I leave up to you all the consideration about it.

I spent the week end backtesting the EA and I came to the following conclusions:
1) this is definitely a martingale strategy
2) in a 10 years test on EURUSD (1H TF) I hit three times the 'margin call' cause by the three big moves this pair had in its recent history, blowing up 100% of the equity
3) in order to test the goodness of the Wolves Waves technique, as a winning strategy, I disabled the martingale allowing the opening of one trade only. Result is that the win ratio is a little higher than 50%, which means you have the same win probability of flipping a coin. In practical terms without the martingale, It 's a FLAT CONSISTENT LOOSER.
4) at the end of the day, what remains it's the martingale which in the majority of the cases is able to recoup the situation but, with 100% certainty, it will lead to a painful crash soon or later.

All the best to everybody.
RS
SandyW
May 07 2012 at 08:42
11 投稿
rs92,

Thanks for that. Good to have your corroboration of my findings. In backtests I found WWEA crashed the account on every pair within a year. However testing using one trade and two trades does seem to produce profit on some pairs while still producing loss on others.

Did you try TFs other than hourly? I got very decent results with GBPUSD and EURGBP on daily chart using much larger lot sizes than default, with modest DD and high PF. Only testing from 1 Jan 2011 though.
rs92
May 07 2012 at 09:15
15 投稿
SandyW,
I only focused on EURUSD 1H. I didn't want to spend much more time on 'just another martingale' strategy.
BTW, the Myfxbook site is still frozen and the last update is 10 hours old while the open 18 positions on 5 crosses are globally loosing a lot. The author is cheating us!!!
SandyW
May 07 2012 at 09:49
11 投稿
rs92,

I get your point about just another martingale EA! Sometimes it seems that everyone who tries to build an EA resorts to martingale to make it profitable, not. A trading strategy which cannot stand on its own will never become profitable simply by adding martingale.

If you were testing only the EURUSD you will certainly have had bad results. That is probably the worst performing pair because it trends strongly. Wolfe Wave needs pairs which 'wave' regularly. So does martingale so that compounds the problem.

Having bought WW EA I am going to persevere with trading two or three pairs on the daily charts, with no martingale. A strategy which appears to be able to generate a good PF with modest DD in back testing cannot be all bad.

I had always had the impression that BJF produced good stuff, but being expensive it was not for me. Now I know it is almost as scammy as everything else. Even tough technically it seems very sophisticated, it is not delivered by a professional trader.
rs92
May 07 2012 at 09:59
15 投稿
Fully agree SandyW.
Your 'A trading strategy which cannot stand on its own will never become profitable simply by adding martingale.' sentence is the perfect synthesis of all this topic.
Thanks
 
Borys Fesenko (iticsoftware)
May 07 2012 at 10:36
121 投稿
Hello guys,
Thank you for your opinions.

1) What is standard martingale strategy? Open X lots, close in loss, open 2X lots, close in loss, open 4X lots, close in profit, start from X lots again.
This approash is not used by WW EA. 1-st trade opened by last WW pattern in a zone of weakness of last movement, 2nd and other trades added to 1-st position. So this strategy belongs to griders class of EAs.

2) Yes, some big drawdowns on supertrends are possible. The trading can be risky due to high profit.
Borys Fesenko (iticsoftware)
May 07 2012 at 10:40
121 投稿

   rs92 posted:
   Fully agree SandyW.
Your 'A trading strategy which cannot stand on its own will never become profitable simply by adding martingale.' sentence is the perfect synthesis of all this topic.
Thanks


OK. Can you develop and monitor any better EA? We will be happy to discuss and criticize it.
Borys Fesenko (iticsoftware)
May 07 2012 at 13:38
121 投稿
We have described our strategy in this video:
You just need to look more carefully at the video and you will understand the principle of the strategy.
1st order we open when price touch ww line (This zone is favorable to the reversal )
If ww line is broken, the price will touch this line from opposite side in 99% cases (The good zone for open order)
SandyW
May 07 2012 at 14:09
11 投稿
Borys,

Agree with your description of classic martinagle, and no one has suggested your EA works that way. However you choose to describe or name your strategy, it increases risk geometrically as a trade moves into loss. Describing that as martingale is just shorthand for describing any strategy which increases risk exponentially as a trade moves into loss. The strategy depends on a hoped for reversal before the account is wiped out. Grid trading strategies may not use geometric progression of trade size, but they too can still lead to account wipe out if there is no reversal in price movement. All this is conventional thinking, and every professional trader knows the risks are huge and not worth taking. Take an EA called ForexHacked, it can produce very attractive results for a while, then eventually crashes an account. Nothing the developer has tried to do to ameliorate the risk has worked in the long run. Your WW EA is the same. If you claim WW EA is simply grid trading, I could point you to a hundred grid trading EAs, using much safer trade sizing than WW EA uses, and they have all failed in the end.

There will only ever be one way to trade WW EA safely, and that is by setting it to trade without martingale or grid (however you choose to describe it). I think you know this, and are simply using martingale/grid to show a steady daily profit (which it does). But you also know that you have limited time to sell the EA as it will sooner or later produce account crashes, and do it fast (that is what such a strategy does, deliver surprises). Make the best of it while you can. By the way how about a refund?
SandyW
May 07 2012 at 14:10
11 投稿
Just out of interest here is a screen shot of WW EA in action. Defeats me!

付属品:

ForexPro
May 07 2012 at 14:51
382 投稿

   SandyW posted:
   Borys,

Agree with your description of classic martinagle, and no one has suggested your EA works that way. However you choose to describe or name your strategy, it increases risk geometrically as a trade moves into loss. Describing that as martingale is just shorthand for describing any strategy which increases risk exponentially as a trade moves into loss. The strategy depends on a hoped for reversal before the account is wiped out. Grid trading strategies may not use geometric progression of trade size, but they too can still lead to account wipe out if there is no reversal in price movement. All this is conventional thinking, and every professional trader knows the risks are huge and not worth taking. Take an EA called ForexHacked, it can produce very attractive results for a while, then eventually crashes an account. Nothing the developer has tried to do to ameliorate the risk has worked in the long run. Your WW EA is the same. If you claim WW EA is simply grid trading, I could point you to a hundred grid trading EAs, using much safer trade sizing than WW EA uses, and they have all failed in the end.

There will only ever be one way to trade WW EA safely, and that is by setting it to trade without martingale or grid (however you choose to describe it). I think you know this, and are simply using martingale/grid to show a steady daily profit (which it does). But you also know that you have limited time to sell the EA as it will sooner or later produce account crashes, and do it fast (that is what such a strategy does, deliver surprises). Make the best of it while you can. By the way how about a refund?

My vouch for you!
forexprofess
May 07 2012 at 16:11
1 投稿
I've bought this ea two months ago. Robot works on my live account without any problems. I trade on Wolfe Waves for several years, so this robot is fully consistent with my ideas about the forex market. Thanks Boris for a good ea!!!!
SandyW
May 07 2012 at 16:28
11 投稿

forexprofess,

That's interesting and encouraging. Would you though be kind enough to tell us which pairs you are trading, what time frames you use and what settings you use. And the killer question, what are you doing to avoid the complete wipe out that seems to be predicted in the backtests some of us have done using the default settings advocated by Borys?

In your earlier, presumably manual, trading using Wolfe Waves, were you adding to your positions as price moved against you? Or just trading a simple Wolfe Wave. I bet your chart didn't look like the one I posted above!!

As you will appreciate I too have bought WW EA, and am trading live, so your answers would be very helpful.
コメント の為にログインしてください