Forex Envy Power Edition (에 의해 forex_trader_47717)
사용자가 이 시스템을 삭제했습니다.
Forex Envy Power Edition 토론
Apr 24, 2012 at 10:50
can I ask why you spend so many hours on this?
the accounts used different brokers, so different spread & execution speed.
the way the EA works will not open the trades at the same price.
and the sets could be different for the different account size, so the TP could be higher or lower.
also I hope that the new version will provide better results.
at least recovering the lost due to the swap.
but the PE will play differently around the news events, compared to the current edition which require a manual process.
and the PE uses dynamics set calculated for the size of the account when the account growth, while the standard edition use a fixed configuration (which can be manually updated, but will not have the same exponantial curve)
so for sure the results are differents for each account.
and without spending hours in analysis, take a look at the expectancy (expected profit per trade) value in myfxbook for april...
L only=5.32$ (404 trades)
LS=2.17$ (1572 trades)
PE=10.92$ (1893 trades)
so the PE appear to provides 5 times more profit per trade compared to the long&short cycles account. We can say that this account is set with low risk settings, (which is confirm by the low DD in march and april while the PE gets an higher DD)
the accounts used different brokers, so different spread & execution speed.
the way the EA works will not open the trades at the same price.
and the sets could be different for the different account size, so the TP could be higher or lower.
also I hope that the new version will provide better results.
at least recovering the lost due to the swap.
but the PE will play differently around the news events, compared to the current edition which require a manual process.
and the PE uses dynamics set calculated for the size of the account when the account growth, while the standard edition use a fixed configuration (which can be manually updated, but will not have the same exponantial curve)
so for sure the results are differents for each account.
and without spending hours in analysis, take a look at the expectancy (expected profit per trade) value in myfxbook for april...
L only=5.32$ (404 trades)
LS=2.17$ (1572 trades)
PE=10.92$ (1893 trades)
so the PE appear to provides 5 times more profit per trade compared to the long&short cycles account. We can say that this account is set with low risk settings, (which is confirm by the low DD in march and april while the PE gets an higher DD)
Apr 24, 2012 at 11:27
Hi Will,
Several reasons,
I'm an engineer my training and birth. I seek to understand how Envy relates to the real world and how I can use it to make serious money, which is the 2nd reason. 3rd is to do proper due diligence on the EA and part of that process is seeing it operating in the same way when placed under similar environments. 4th is to understand how scalable Envy is and how to ensure as the capital base compounds and grows, the delivered ROI stays somewhat stable.
Your quoted $ / trade is of course in cents. Mine are based on the entire trade history.
To me it would appear to me Envy tests the market via the min sized Lots and makes it's money from the approx 180% increases as it chases a change in the market direction. While I have no issue with this, I do have concerns about Envy continues to deliver a somewhat stable ROI as the account grows seeing there is no real inbuilt compounding capability. It seems to be more a fixed size Martingale style trader that needs TE to craft the next set file for the increased capital base.
Now this all works, if it does and how reliable will TE be to support a growing capital base is yet to be proven to be workable. Until that happens, I will continue work to become as knowledgeable and capable as possible of modifying the set files to match a growing capital base.
Because of my nature, as my knowledge grows, I will share that with who ever wishes to be involved.
Several reasons,
I'm an engineer my training and birth. I seek to understand how Envy relates to the real world and how I can use it to make serious money, which is the 2nd reason. 3rd is to do proper due diligence on the EA and part of that process is seeing it operating in the same way when placed under similar environments. 4th is to understand how scalable Envy is and how to ensure as the capital base compounds and grows, the delivered ROI stays somewhat stable.
Your quoted $ / trade is of course in cents. Mine are based on the entire trade history.
To me it would appear to me Envy tests the market via the min sized Lots and makes it's money from the approx 180% increases as it chases a change in the market direction. While I have no issue with this, I do have concerns about Envy continues to deliver a somewhat stable ROI as the account grows seeing there is no real inbuilt compounding capability. It seems to be more a fixed size Martingale style trader that needs TE to craft the next set file for the increased capital base.
Now this all works, if it does and how reliable will TE be to support a growing capital base is yet to be proven to be workable. Until that happens, I will continue work to become as knowledgeable and capable as possible of modifying the set files to match a growing capital base.
Because of my nature, as my knowledge grows, I will share that with who ever wishes to be involved.
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 25, 2012 at 03:23
(편집됨 Apr 25, 2012 at 03:26)
Seems not all Envy accounts are the same. Some are over financed to protect large DDs and as a result of the wasted capital, run at reduced ROIs. Bottom line is to run with a HeadRoom / initial capital invested that gives you a 50% initial capital margin as against a worst case DD. Doing this optimizes the ROI on the invested capital.
Looks like Envy Long can be run with a HeadRoom of around 8,500, survive well due to lower % DDs and generate over 100% ROI per month. Almost as good as Envy Power if likewise adjusted. Of course Power does not have the length of time to see DD events as does Long, so Power may need more initial capital to achieve a 50% worst case DD cover.
Looks like I'm stopping my Short cycles and asking Envy for optimized set files for just long cycles that with generate a 8,500 HeadRoom. To me that seems to be equivalent to Envy opening min Lot sizes of 0.05 as against my $1k invested. This analysis also says to me that running Short cycles and increasing min lots to 0.02 could blow the account but stopping the Shorts and increasing min Lots on Longs to 0.05 should be safe and increase my monthly ROI 5 times.
Your Mileage May Vary.
Looks like Envy Long can be run with a HeadRoom of around 8,500, survive well due to lower % DDs and generate over 100% ROI per month. Almost as good as Envy Power if likewise adjusted. Of course Power does not have the length of time to see DD events as does Long, so Power may need more initial capital to achieve a 50% worst case DD cover.
Looks like I'm stopping my Short cycles and asking Envy for optimized set files for just long cycles that with generate a 8,500 HeadRoom. To me that seems to be equivalent to Envy opening min Lot sizes of 0.05 as against my $1k invested. This analysis also says to me that running Short cycles and increasing min lots to 0.02 could blow the account but stopping the Shorts and increasing min Lots on Longs to 0.05 should be safe and increase my monthly ROI 5 times.
Your Mileage May Vary.
첨부 파일:
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 25, 2012 at 12:53
Will,
I opened a InstaForex penny account only to find it is a 4 digit account and has a very slow (~1.5 sec) order execution time versus the demo account at 0.4 sec. Was told that to get 5 digits I have to use their EU server but then can't use penny accounts. Are you getting good results with InstaForex and 4 digit trades?
Additionally they have a 3 digit spread and a StopLevel of 3 pips. That means Envy can't place TP or SL closer than 6 pips from the current price and no placing orders inside the spread.
It worries me Envy will do a good job on InstaForex.
TradeFort gives me 5 digits, 0 StopLevel and around 1 to 1.5 pip spread. To me that gives Envy more ability to do a good job, place TPs and SLs closer to the current price and deliver a good ROI. That is probably why Power is running on TradeFort.
I opened a InstaForex penny account only to find it is a 4 digit account and has a very slow (~1.5 sec) order execution time versus the demo account at 0.4 sec. Was told that to get 5 digits I have to use their EU server but then can't use penny accounts. Are you getting good results with InstaForex and 4 digit trades?
Additionally they have a 3 digit spread and a StopLevel of 3 pips. That means Envy can't place TP or SL closer than 6 pips from the current price and no placing orders inside the spread.
It worries me Envy will do a good job on InstaForex.
TradeFort gives me 5 digits, 0 StopLevel and around 1 to 1.5 pip spread. To me that gives Envy more ability to do a good job, place TPs and SLs closer to the current price and deliver a good ROI. That is probably why Power is running on TradeFort.
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 25, 2012 at 13:23
I'm not using the peny account, I'm using the EU server with 5 digits.
not the 4digits one.
Like I'm saying before... yes its 3pips, fixed for a lot of pairs.
and the rebaes is 1.3pips.
so finally you'll have 1.7pips of 'real' spread.
for some pairs its better then other brokers.
The speed is not important for forex envy.
maybe the set are differents from 1 broker to another to reflect the spread difference.
but... the 1.3pip will reduce the loosing trades and increase the wininng trades... while no rebates = the loss is the loss the win is the win. maybe there is a difference of 1pip for the trade itself, but the 1.3 rebate results in better results.
from what I can see from different FE published account, the instaforex accounts performs better than the others.
take a look at the Birt's account.
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/birt/forex-envy/265257
if I take a look at an AUDUSD batch, his account wins 41pips-14.7+13.2 = 39.5
I got 40pips -14.6+12.9 = 38.3 + 3*1.3=42.2
So I have 7% more profit...
we can see that the TP is different from 1 pip, but for the batch its not 3*1pip the difference is only 1.2 pips. and I'm still the winner...
so a good speed and a low spread is not a guarantee of better results...
not the 4digits one.
Like I'm saying before... yes its 3pips, fixed for a lot of pairs.
and the rebaes is 1.3pips.
so finally you'll have 1.7pips of 'real' spread.
for some pairs its better then other brokers.
The speed is not important for forex envy.
maybe the set are differents from 1 broker to another to reflect the spread difference.
but... the 1.3pip will reduce the loosing trades and increase the wininng trades... while no rebates = the loss is the loss the win is the win. maybe there is a difference of 1pip for the trade itself, but the 1.3 rebate results in better results.
from what I can see from different FE published account, the instaforex accounts performs better than the others.
take a look at the Birt's account.
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/birt/forex-envy/265257
if I take a look at an AUDUSD batch, his account wins 41pips-14.7+13.2 = 39.5
I got 40pips -14.6+12.9 = 38.3 + 3*1.3=42.2
So I have 7% more profit...
we can see that the TP is different from 1 pip, but for the batch its not 3*1pip the difference is only 1.2 pips. and I'm still the winner...
so a good speed and a low spread is not a guarantee of better results...
Apr 25, 2012 at 13:59
Hi Will,
Thanks for the information and link. Looks interesting. Will consider opening the same.
I note Birt's account is Long cycles only. From my studies such an account needs a HeadRoom of around 8,500 or on a penny account $150 in Nett funding, even less if you get a Broker Bonus of say 50%. Brit funded it with $400. This means he has too much HeadRoom and as a result a reduced ROI. Had he funded it with $100 + a $50 Broker Bonus, the ROI against his funds would be 4 times higher or 27.2% monthly ROI instead of the current 6.8%.
Thanks for the information and link. Looks interesting. Will consider opening the same.
I note Birt's account is Long cycles only. From my studies such an account needs a HeadRoom of around 8,500 or on a penny account $150 in Nett funding, even less if you get a Broker Bonus of say 50%. Brit funded it with $400. This means he has too much HeadRoom and as a result a reduced ROI. Had he funded it with $100 + a $50 Broker Bonus, the ROI against his funds would be 4 times higher or 27.2% monthly ROI instead of the current 6.8%.
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 25, 2012 at 14:30
The reason Trading is showing a better curve than Long/Short is because in the first week the min Lots was set to 0.02. I guess to get the account balance up quicker so as to show a higher ROI from the too low $50 input. Almost worked but they had to put in more money to keep it out of a StopOut event. Good try but luck was not with them.
Started today my Longs at 0.02 for 1 week and then 0.03 for the next and then 0.04 for the next week and 0.05 from then on. The increasing account balance should give additional HeadRoom. Time will tell how well my plan has worked or not.
I'm told Power should out mid May. Plan to run it on a live account with $100 + $50 of the Brokers money invested until the dust settles down and I can see what is what.
What are your plans with 3.0?
Started today my Longs at 0.02 for 1 week and then 0.03 for the next and then 0.04 for the next week and 0.05 from then on. The increasing account balance should give additional HeadRoom. Time will tell how well my plan has worked or not.
I'm told Power should out mid May. Plan to run it on a live account with $100 + $50 of the Brokers money invested until the dust settles down and I can see what is what.
What are your plans with 3.0?
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 25, 2012 at 14:45
just take care about the conditions associated to your bonus... if they remove it when tge margin is low, you'll get a margin call ;)
its better to keep safe levels until the bonus is in your hand, and then raise the risk.
I'll switch to the new version as quickly as possible. the automated freeze before a news will be great.
but I want to see the options we'll have in our hand. except a level of ris, what else we can manage(?)
I expect to see a better overall balanced management.
so each pair will open trade based on the overall current opened trades... to make sure that not more than 3 pairs goes against us...
so if the system activate the freeze after TP for the pairs which are not in trouble while others cause you some troubles... it will be great. in this scenario, the free headroom will be dedicated to the pair with the biggest lots until the TP is reached...
we'll se... :)
its better to keep safe levels until the bonus is in your hand, and then raise the risk.
I'll switch to the new version as quickly as possible. the automated freeze before a news will be great.
but I want to see the options we'll have in our hand. except a level of ris, what else we can manage(?)
I expect to see a better overall balanced management.
so each pair will open trade based on the overall current opened trades... to make sure that not more than 3 pairs goes against us...
so if the system activate the freeze after TP for the pairs which are not in trouble while others cause you some troubles... it will be great. in this scenario, the free headroom will be dedicated to the pair with the biggest lots until the TP is reached...
we'll se... :)
Apr 25, 2012 at 14:56
Once I get to opening Lots = 0.05. I plan to continue increasing the opening Lots determined from this formula.
BaseLotSize = (Account Balance - StopOut %) / 2,000,000. IE $111,111 (really $1,111) with a 10% StopOut would generate a Lot size of 0.05 (if the result is more than 2 digits, only use the first 2 digits) and a HeadRoom of 8,500 based on my TradeFort account settings and a max DD of TWICE that observed so far on the Long only cycle account. If I get a DD exceeding that observed so far I will increase the HeadRoom to maintain twice the HeadRoom as necessary to survive the max DD.
BaseLotSize = (Account Balance - StopOut %) / 2,000,000. IE $111,111 (really $1,111) with a 10% StopOut would generate a Lot size of 0.05 (if the result is more than 2 digits, only use the first 2 digits) and a HeadRoom of 8,500 based on my TradeFort account settings and a max DD of TWICE that observed so far on the Long only cycle account. If I get a DD exceeding that observed so far I will increase the HeadRoom to maintain twice the HeadRoom as necessary to survive the max DD.
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 25, 2012 at 15:04
willgart posted:
just take care about the conditions associated to your bonus... if they remove it when tge margin is low, you'll get a margin call ;)
its better to keep safe levels until the bonus is in your hand, and then raise the risk.
I'll switch to the new version as quickly as possible. the automated freeze before a news will be great.
but I want to see the options we'll have in our hand. except a level of ris, what else we can manage(?)
I expect to see a better overall balanced management.
so each pair will open trade based on the overall current opened trades... to make sure that not more than 3 pairs goes against us...
so if the system activate the freeze after TP for the pairs which are not in trouble while others cause you some troubles... it will be great. in this scenario, the free headroom will be dedicated to the pair with the biggest lots until the TP is reached...
we'll se... :)
Hi Will,
That is why I starting out at 0.02 and increasing 0.01 every week as the account builds up to bigger than the desired 8,500 HeadRoom required for the next BaseLotSize increase. DDs biggest than the max observed so far on the Long account will cause the min HeadRoom to increase.
While Envy is very smart and automatic, I'm crafting an external Macro Money Manager which also learns, adopts to the Market and helps Envy to safely deliver a higher than expected ROI. Maybe one day Robert and his team will put something like what I'm developing into Envy.
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 25, 2012 at 15:09
(편집됨 Apr 25, 2012 at 15:14)
Well done Envy and TE. All my Short cycle baskets closed in profit. I'm impressed.
Here for all to see:
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/BealBull/envy-21-live/291863
Now we start 1 week of BaseLotSize = 0.02 for all 9 Long cycle pairs.
Here for all to see:
https://www.myfxbook.com/members/BealBull/envy-21-live/291863
Now we start 1 week of BaseLotSize = 0.02 for all 9 Long cycle pairs.
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 26, 2012 at 02:04
(편집됨 Apr 26, 2012 at 02:08)
I should add one reason I'm doing this timed BaseLotSize increment trial is to see how Envy responds to increased min open sized orders. Does it deliver a linear increase in $ /Trade profit (as expected) or are there internal algorithms which kick in as open lot sizes increase and alter / reduce the $ /Trade profit / BaseLotSize ratio? Time will tell.
Of course there are the other issues:
1) Concern about reducing the DD HeadRoom as the BaseLotSize increases.
2) The natural desire to increase the ROI on the funds invested.
Hopefully this test will help to determine the optimal Sweet Spot (BaseLotSize versus HeadRoom versus survivable DD versus best ROI) that lets me sleep at night, while knowing Envy's Long cycles are delivering the best ROI on my funds that they can.
When I get my hands on 3.0 and the Power set files, I plan to do a similar trial, so as to determine the optimal Power Sweet Spot. I plan to run Power on another identical TradeFort account so as to compare an optimized HeadRoom and ROI ver 2.1 Long cycle account to the ver 3.0 account doing what ever and however it runs.
While Power does look very good, I learned a long time ago not to put all my eggs in one basket. Diversity is where safety lies.
Interesting times.
Of course there are the other issues:
1) Concern about reducing the DD HeadRoom as the BaseLotSize increases.
2) The natural desire to increase the ROI on the funds invested.
Hopefully this test will help to determine the optimal Sweet Spot (BaseLotSize versus HeadRoom versus survivable DD versus best ROI) that lets me sleep at night, while knowing Envy's Long cycles are delivering the best ROI on my funds that they can.
When I get my hands on 3.0 and the Power set files, I plan to do a similar trial, so as to determine the optimal Power Sweet Spot. I plan to run Power on another identical TradeFort account so as to compare an optimized HeadRoom and ROI ver 2.1 Long cycle account to the ver 3.0 account doing what ever and however it runs.
While Power does look very good, I learned a long time ago not to put all my eggs in one basket. Diversity is where safety lies.
Interesting times.
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 30, 2012 at 10:42
Very interesting EA... have only just started to take a look at it and I have not bought it yet.
At first glance it looks like it would be great for broker that offers a good rebate though an IB like Cashback forex.
Anyone have any opinions on using the EA with a large account size? So that one could stay away from the 'cent' accounts. Still 1:500 leverage but a normal account with lot sizes starting at 0.01 of a full lot. What would be the recommended starting capital? 50K? 75K?
Anyway... think I'll purchase it and check it out on demo.
Cheers
At first glance it looks like it would be great for broker that offers a good rebate though an IB like Cashback forex.
Anyone have any opinions on using the EA with a large account size? So that one could stay away from the 'cent' accounts. Still 1:500 leverage but a normal account with lot sizes starting at 0.01 of a full lot. What would be the recommended starting capital? 50K? 75K?
Anyway... think I'll purchase it and check it out on demo.
Cheers
Apr 30, 2012 at 10:53
flopps posted:
Very interesting EA... have only just started to take a look at it and I have not bought it yet.
At first glance it looks like it would be great for broker that offers a good rebate though an IB like Cashback forex.
Anyone have any opinions on using the EA with a large account size? So that one could stay away from the 'cent' accounts. Still 1:500 leverage but a normal account with lot sizes starting at 0.01 of a full lot. What would be the recommended starting capital? 50K? 75K?
Anyway... think I'll purchase it and check it out on demo.
Cheers
contact the ForexEnvy team, they'll answer all your questions.
take a look at the Birt's site (eareview.net) where there is a resume about the EA and the account size required here too.
Apr 30, 2012 at 11:02
Hi Flopps,
Team Envy should be your first stop on account funding requirements.
Birt's independent EA site is another source with Envy 2.1 account sizes broken down via different Broker mechanics:
https://eareview.net/live-forward-test/forex-envy
You may be interested in reviewing the DonnaForex forum on Envy. It is very informative:
https://www.donnaforex.com/forum/index.php?topic=4935.0
Good Trading,
BB
Team Envy should be your first stop on account funding requirements.
Birt's independent EA site is another source with Envy 2.1 account sizes broken down via different Broker mechanics:
https://eareview.net/live-forward-test/forex-envy
You may be interested in reviewing the DonnaForex forum on Envy. It is very informative:
https://www.donnaforex.com/forum/index.php?topic=4935.0
Good Trading,
BB
No ROI in a dead account
Apr 30, 2012 at 13:06
MyFxBook is showing another account busting DD of $5,230 ($52.30 in real money) happened 27 April. Not much before, on 15 April, the account had another buster DD of $5,632 ($56.32 in real money).
Ok maybe just my Stats side kicking-in but 2 potential account busting DDs 12 days apart in the first 5 week of Power's life?? My gut feel says we need to fund a Power account to handle DDs of at least 8 times this amount. IE instead of funding Power with $50, it should have been funded with $400.
I should add that according to Birt's web site, the MyFxBook max DDs are conservative and after researching his finer DD data collection it would appear real time DDs can be 2 times that shown on MyFxBook.
I plan to be VERY cautious with Power and would rather over fund the account for 3 - 4 months until there is sufficient time to see how deep the Power DDs are before putting a LOT on money on the Power nose.
YMMY,
BB
Ok maybe just my Stats side kicking-in but 2 potential account busting DDs 12 days apart in the first 5 week of Power's life?? My gut feel says we need to fund a Power account to handle DDs of at least 8 times this amount. IE instead of funding Power with $50, it should have been funded with $400.
I should add that according to Birt's web site, the MyFxBook max DDs are conservative and after researching his finer DD data collection it would appear real time DDs can be 2 times that shown on MyFxBook.
I plan to be VERY cautious with Power and would rather over fund the account for 3 - 4 months until there is sufficient time to see how deep the Power DDs are before putting a LOT on money on the Power nose.
YMMY,
BB
No ROI in a dead account
