Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Regarding Petkos 6 month and 1 month, I believe Petko has determined through experience that it works well and has some logical sense but I’m sure he will confirm his reasons when you reads this.
My feel for these date ranges is that the longer filter is serving as more of a general robustness test of the EA and then the shorter filter serving as a selection based on what is performing best on a shorter more recent timeframe. Wether 12 months and 2 months or 4 months and 2 weeks may perform better I don’t know.
Also It’s not to say that the Ea won’t perform well after a month but just that the process should be repeated on a reasonably frequent basis to adapt to changing market conditions.
I agree with the logic of the approach and certainly used to get good results on demo when I started out using it. I remember my first months results were 50% profit that steadily grew over the month (using 10k account and 0.1 lot size) but I personally would be at least halfing my lot size in order to reduce my risk.
I would practice it for a few months and see how you get on (using demo account of course). Fairly easy to run other tests alongside it as it only takes a couple of hours at most once a month.
Also I think that for finding EAs that will work long term I would be putting say 100 or so EAs that you have generated onto a demo account and just leave them trading for a few months and then view the results, but a quicker way would be to run the reactor with an end date set the 3 months in the past and then use the validator to check how they performed for the 3 month walk forward.
It all depends on how proficient and confident that you can match EA studio with demo trading effectively.
In my opinion people new to EA studio should start out managing with demo for a while before transitioning to purely using Ea studio to manage a pool of EAs.
No worries Steve, glad it makes sense and is helpful :-)
Thats fair enough in wanting to leave them on indefinitely however I believe there should be some ongoing tuning of the EAs wether that be to keep the same EAs and tune them ongoingly as Petko does in the top 12 course you are going through.Or switch out new robots monthly like is done in the professional course.
Or you can manage your robots by moving too performing EAs from a demo account to live or mock live account (which is just an alternative way of achieveing the same thing as is performed in the professional course without demo trading really)
i personally prefer just managing my robots by having lots on demo and then using FXBlue to monitor and select the EAs but it’s the same as professional course method so just a preference.
Also it’s by design that Ea studio portfolio only does a single asset portfolio. It’s purpose is to create a portfolio expert advisor that can only be attached to a single chart so all the strategies in the portfolio must be for the same symbol and timeframe.
I initially thought it would be good to have a feature to do a combined asset portfolio but its not something I would use anymore even if it existed actually.
Yes I agree with Petko on large stop loss and small take profit being able to work well.
Your logic is reasonable, however remember it is the average winning trade / average losing trade x the probability of winning that is important.
For example what would you prefer:
Strategy A: 1:1 stop loss or take profit ratio with a 60% win/loss ratio
Strategy B: 2:1 stop loss to take profit ratio but with a 80% win/loss ratio
Let’s use 100 dollars risk as an example;
Strategy A should make 10 trades and win 600 and lose 400 which will mean 200 profit with a profit ratio of 1.5
Strategy B should make 10 trades and win 400 and lose 200 which is also 200 profit but has a profit ratio of 2
That example is only expecting a much smaller relative increase in probability of winning against a halving of the tp/sl ratio also and still outperforms it.
The probability of the trades winning combined with the risk to reward ratio of each trade is what’s important.
Hi Steve, yes you are right in EA studio you can only create a single asset portfolio. But can check the combined results manually easily enough.
Also I would say that expecting 7 months results to be good for a strategy only developed using 2 years of data on M5 is also pretty unrealistic.
2-3 months would be a better wf amount in my opinion.
Also remember you are not managing robots in anyway with that system but simply putting them on and leaving them for 7 months (which is ages).
Also you seem to be very restrictive in the strategies you are targeting with EA studio, care to explain your logic further?
Often principles of discretionary trading don’t cross over properly to algo trading
Hi Steve,
First point is that you can never be 100% sure that a generated strategy hasn’t been over optimized or will perform well in the future really. Robustness testing will certainly reduce this likelihood and I wouldn’t be trading a strategy that didn’t pass this filter.
It sounds like you are generating a collection using the reactor and then adding them all to the portfolio and then checking OOS and not getting a profitable single asset portfolio? This isn’t too surprising really
I would be putting together a multi asset portfolio rather than a single asset portfolio.
Hey Alan that is all sounding good and yes now the next step is to see how many reactors is optimal for each machine. I am guessing 3-4.
The number generated is the most important bit here, I’m sure if you left the above test running longer then difference in the number collected gap would widen but then also as you get more strategies the likelihood of correlated strategies not making it through increases. Main point is all is looking well now and you are fine tuning and starting to get to work on your personal pool of robots :-)
Yep Alan, that’s the way to use the validator to organize your collections and yes also combining in this way will be the best point to sort and filter the final 10.
For general robustness the Monte Carlo is enough.
Unless you are trying to target something specific with the Multimarket or Walk forward validations but otherwise Id just stick to Monte Carlo. That’s what I do.
It sounds like you are building up your pool of strategies nicely now right?
Yes combining them by running through validator is a good idea. Mainly because it will remove correlations and duplicate strategies and also it’s good to run the Monte Carlo a second time. But even if not running a second Monte Carlo and just running through the acceptance criteria the validator will trim out the correlated strategies that wouldn’t have been collected had they all been generated in a single reactor.
Hey Alan,
If you are using the Monte Carlo on the validator then that is what is going on. There is randomness in the Monte Carlo sometimes s strategy may just pass the 80% threshold and sometimes it may just fail it for example. But that’s okay the 34 going through are only the ones that have passed the Monte Carlo twice :-)
That all sounds great Alan, you are well on your way now :-).
Glad we got it resolved eventually. Was a puzzler for a while there!
In my experience each extra reactor will slow down things a little bit but there is a sweet spot, for example adding a second might mean that each reactor generates 1000 a minute which means combined you are getting 2000 a minute, a third might reduce this the each getting 800 a minute which is still 2400 combined so an over all improvement but then suddenly a 4th might slow it down more considerably to only getting 500 a minute and then thats 2000 combined and so the sweet spot is 3 reactors.
Hey Alan, that’s definitely sounding more reasonable and giving you something to work with.
Make sure you save all your work and build up a nice pool of robots so that you can save yourself a lot of time in the future by reusing your results with the validator :-)
Also am I right in thinking that you have already purchased petkos Ea package and get robots every month?
You run the reactor to generate from scratch but you can also load in as many existing EAs as you can to the validator and run with the same settings, that way you will get lots of EAs into your collection MUCH faster.
Also make sure you check how running a few reactors at same time on each laptop goes as I’m pretty sure that would be the optimal amount for your hardware (6 reactors in total is absolutely plenty), and always keep an eye on those generations rather than only what’s collected and make sure that after 10 hrs you have equivalent of roughly 1000 a minute for 10 hrs straight on each reactor
Sounds like all is well now though and you just need to get to work in building up a nice pool of robots for yourself now right? ;-)
Yes Alan, that is exactly what will make the difference! If you put another window in the front the browser will become inactive. This is the cause, we got there eventually :-)
You need the screen on and can have several browsers running in the foreground as long as you position them to all remain active.
There are some cost effective vps options but if it doesn’t feel like an preferred option then totally not required, it’s just good to have options :-)