Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@Bob-Yes, I meant that I am trading 14 different assets in total. On live I only have 10 of the assets being traded because those are the EAs that passed my criteria. Here is a list of the assets that I am trading as these are my favorites:
XAUUSD, AUDUSD, EURUSD, USDCAD, USDJPY, UKOUSD, USOUSD, GBPUSD, USDCHF, AUDJPY, EURGBP, EURJPY, GBPJPY, XAGUSD
Once my account hits $10k, I will start to slowly introduce the cryptocurrencies and global indicies back in. Diversification is key for me. And I only created EAs off of 3 timeframes: M15, M30, and H1.
@Roman-Yup, I’m using the 30% and it has made such a great, huge difference in the strategies that I am generating for the better. I just copied what Petko had in his videos and went with that. Thank goodness for Petko.
@Stephen-Yes, this is with trading at 0.1 lots. I always generate my strategies with trading at 0.1 lots. I will then just increase the lot size during live trading when I feel my account balance is high enough to handle the risk.
@Stephen-Sorry about that. You caught my error. I meant that I was trading with a 1:100 leverage. :)
Hey everyone! Posting an update on things…My trading portfolio is currently setup with 14 different assets and a total of 18 EAs trading live right now and demo testing 66 EAs right now. :)
Hey everyone! Just wanted to post an update of the Acceptance Criteria that I am using after having implemented the OOS from watching Petko’s videos:
Complete backtest-Minimum win/loss ratio-0.7In Sample (training) part-Minimum net profit-100 and Minimum r-squared-65
Out of Sample (trading) part-Same as In Sample
Doing well with this. :)
Hey everyone! Just getting back into posting on the forum. I was going to update my live account to a 1:500 leverage, but I decided not to do so as there is no need at this time. So, I’m still working with a 1:00 leverage and have been doing just fine. :)
Hi Petko!
I just saw that EA Studio updated again. Can you maybe help explain what is going with the new way that strategies are being generated in the reactor. Here is a screenshot of my reactor running as of today:
Before the update, the generated strategies and the passed validation numbers were the same. I thought that this is because I am not using the Common Acceptance Criteria in the Generator settings. After the update, I am still not using the Common Acceptance Criteria in the generator settings, but now the numbers between the generated strategies and passed validation are different. I’m curious as to what validation is being used on these strategies. Can you shed some light on this?
Also, I see that the Optimization has been updated to Full Data Optimization. This is where I keep the R-squared and % OOS optimzation to take place and it looks like it is working the same way. Will you be doing a video explaining this section in more detail?
Thanks so much.
@Desita-I did the same thing..not looking at strategies where the equity line is going down after generation. But since I am generating fewer strategies, I start to look at these and keep them in mind because it may be just going into its losing phase and will come back in winning later on. I agree, I am really mad at myself for not using OOS sooner.
@Haliffa-Thanks for the compliment! I would say that this is me being very conservative, but not overly cautious. If I became overly cautious as well, then none of my EAs would ever go live! LOL.
@Desita-Hey there! I honestly tried to get out testing on Demo and only using Petko’s system of the OOS, but I just couldn’t confidently let it go. I guess this may be considered overly cautious, but I really don’t like waste time or money. So I do a combination of both.
I generate the strategies using my broker’s live historical data and include the updated criteria that Petko showed using the R-squared and 30% OOS. I then take these strategies and run them through the MT strategy tester (since I am using MT5, it might be a bit different for those on MT4). I analyze the last 10 trades to see if the win/loss is still at 70% or above.
For example..strategy generated and ran through tester shows a total count of trades to be 125. I go back to trade 110 (not 115) to analyze and see if 70% win/loss performance is maintained. From there I check the win/loss performance of trades 120-125. Lets say it is 4-1 in winning trades at this time. I then put this EA in demo for the next 5 trades to complete another 10 trade analysis. If it maintains losing more than 2 trades out of the next 5 trades, then this has maintained the 70% winning performance and passed demo testing. Potentially this is an EA that I could start live trading. There are other factors I look at as well before immediately putting them on, like profit factor, # of pips moved, etc.
Let’s take this same scenario and have it start off as a losing strategy, for instance it is sitting at 2-3 in winning trades. This means that it cannot have any more losses out of the next 5 trades to pass my demo criteria. Sometimes they pass and sometimes they don’t. But I have found that being this strict has helped me to avoid some major catastrophes.
Hope this helps.
@Desita-Sorry, it took so long for me to reply. I was having issues logging in and for some reason, the forum wasn’t allowing me to respond. But now I can. I use the win/loss ratio as 0.70 (meaning 7 out of 10 trades are winners) I only will accept 3 losses out of 10 trades. This is just my conservative way of trading. But after watching Petko’s courses on the updates, I now use the win/loss ratio of 0.70 for the complete backtest as well as a minimum count of trades. I use the OOS just the way Petko shows us as well as the R-squared for optimization. After doing this, my strategies have become so much better.
@Petko-You’re absolutely right. I still do. It is a lot easier for me to analyze an EA results in FX Blue Live with just monitoring the win/loss vs, anything else.
Hope everyone else is doing well and happy trading! My commodities are on a roll lately and my forex pairs with GBP and JPY are doing fantastic this month!
@Thapelo-I’m using 0.70 as my minimum in the acceptance criteria and only under the complete test part.
@Desita-I believe Petko had mentioned to me that it is not connected to the EAs. I honestly did not see a difference when I changed the leverage setting in EA Studio. But I’ll let Petko confirm.
@Andi-I actually stopped using my broker’s VPS and switched over to Contabo. I have had no issues since the change.