Posts made by roar

@ramisignals yes, still error. Try starting a new project...

@cesardefez you must select the object before checking it.
Here's working example of a button
https://fxdreema.com/shared/4LWM6r3Ac

@ramisignals Yes, I got the error too. I guess you can't make a blank EA. Why do you care, you can't use an empty EA anyway?

@ramisignals its an empty project?

@ptt196 partial close doesnt really work on mt4, it just closes the whole position and then opens a smaller one (= double commissions). Mt5 would do it properly.

It might be easier to split your trades into smaller ones in the first place - buy 1, 1, 1, 1 and 6 lots. Then you can simply close those 1 lot trades. Also, you can differentiate between the 1 lot and 6 lot trades by setting some group numbers.
Just 1 framework, there's other solutions too...

@tsheppo here the else output means that your EA will NOT buy if there is a round number.

Anyway, your EA (or tester) doesnt make much sense to me.

@tsheppo why are you using the else output for buy?

Well, here's the test

@tsheppo using the default settings?

@sidmcfarland yeah, maybe that is the bug inside the cross operator: it forgets to check the = case, just like I did

@sidmcfarland I think you are on to something... I even modified the example so that there is no cross operator, just two separate conditions with candle ID 1 and 2 (= how the cross theoritically works).
Even then I dont get a line on one particular cross.

https://fxdreema.com/shared/PY7X9YzLc

@seb-0 the opimization looks okayish to me... At least the forward didnt completely kill it lol

I did a final test with the best forward result, red lines mark the total sample period (6/2013 - 6/2019, half is forward). A bit worryingly, out-of-sample test seems to behave different than in-sample. This might mean the good optimization is just a coincidence, you get lots of pretty coincidences when you run 10000 tests.

In conclusion, can't say anything for certain, maybe maybe maybe More trades would bring more confidence, to my experience...

@sidmcfarland you have a example EA proving this bug? Maybe draw a vertical line every time the MAs cross?

@seb-0 I agree, the levels should stay 40-60 or perhaps 30-70, no reason to try everything. Just thought you wanted to optimize them, as you had the constants. I do my testing on FXTM, they seem to have the data

@tsheppo I'm sorry to bring bad news, but your EA will not be profitable. The 1 pip trailing stop is making your tester malfunction.

@seb-0 running some optimization rn..
First thoughts

• the EA trades quite rarely, especially on H1. Around 200 trades a year is OK, but I would be happier if it traded more - you get more statistical reliability. This is also why I chose a longer test period, from 2013
• you have separate constants for "uplimit" and "downlimit". This makes some trouble, because you would logically expect the optimal limits to be symmetrical. A solution: use only one of them, "uplimit" for example, and define "downlimit" as "100-uplimit" in the block.

@seb-0 sure, send it. The forward scatter doesnt necessarily have to be increasing, we dont live in a perfect world

@tsheppo ok. Well, you might be optimist, but I think my graph is closer to the harsh reality.

In your graph, trades almost never hit SL, even though the SL is incredibly tight. Doesnt sound credible to me.

If you share the project, I can convert to mt5 and test with the smarter tester.

@tsheppo dont have perfect quality, but doesnt change the fact - your SL is too small, no one can predict the market with such accuracy

@woman yes, just a single pass. "Max times to pass" changes that amount - if 5, for example, the block will pass 5 times (on the first 5 price updates of that particular candle).

@ajmd97fx you can use any MQL function.
So here's the list, I guess
https://docs.mql4.com/
https://www.mql5.com/en/docs