MrPip,

Thank you for your comments. I agree, test with M1 data is much more reliable than it is using higher time frame's data. The thing is though, that I used M1 data during my earlier tests either, otherwise I would not have been able to reach 90% modelling quality. I used IB FX platform and Alpari data downloaded from here: http://www.alpari-idc.ru/en/dc/databank.php.

Here goes the M1 result in two variations. I do not think the difference is relevant to my earlier results just because I used M1 data and "Every tick (based on all available least timeframes with fractal interpolation of every tick)" model for those tests.

I used M30 and sometimes M15 timeframes (and once M5) because I think most traders use M30 or M15 for trading breakout systems. (It is just an assumption, I do not state that there is no trader who uses M1 for breakout systems but I do not think that using M1 is common for this trading technique.)

I also attach Hendrick's ebook about how to reach 90% modelling quality for those members (if any) who have not come across with that.

Attached Files

	Statements_M1.rar (31.3 KB, 134 views)
	Test_90%.pdf (330.7 KB, 241 views)

chrisstoff,
I would not suggest using Alpari data with IBFX. Why not just download Alpari MT4 and backtest with that. One concern is when the broker server time is different than the broker where you get the data. In that situation the daata will be shifted. The same is true between data from IBFX and FXDD. The data is differnt by 2 hours so 4 hour bars are completely different.

Also when I say test on 1 minute data you only need modeling quality around 25% as that is the best the formula will show. The indicators are all locked to the 30 minute, 1 hour and 4 hour timeframes for signals. The reason for using 1 minute time frame is for more accurate exits from stoploss or take profit.

The actual signals do not come from the 1 minute candles. That is why I have an input for SignalTimeFrame.

Robert

Dear ALL
Sorry for my absence, flood disaster has invaded my city,the electricity has been turned off for 5 days until now. I couldn't follow this discussion for a moment.

Anyone, please be kindly posting update files which are necessary to be put on the first page. I will attach those file ASAP,
I really glad to see Mr Pip and Mini Me helping all the traders here. I promise I will be active as soon as this disaster over.

May Pips with you all and always remember what Mini Me said

-Sharing is Caring-

ANCOLL , Glad to have you back, and I am sorry for the bad weather I hope your fine and no one is hurt... if it makes you feel better today it was -23C here in Montreal, and it gets worse.

Thanks Robert for the explanation, its very good point you have raised here. That’s why both back and forward tests are required b4 deciding to use an EA on a live account.
For the record I have noticed a couple of times that the data feed differ from borker to another i took a screen shots and send it to MIG and their reply was
((( Dear Sir,
There are some wrong quotes coming to the market watch. They do not affect the trades, because no orders are processed on these wrong prices, but they unfortunately affect the graphs.
Best regards,
xxxxxxxxx
MIG Investments SA)))
This does not happen a lot, but it makes the price on MT4 charts useless.

__________________

MrPip,

Thank you for your post.

Attached are the test results as per your suggestion. Of course there are differences to the earlier ones but I still do not think they are that significant (but everybody has the possibility to decide what is a significant difference for him/her).

I usually use Alpari data since their database is the most reliable in the industry according to the general opinion of most of those traders who think backtest has some importance.

I usually use IBFX platform because I use live service of this brokerage as well and I do not use Alpari service live for the time being.

I do not think that the 2 hours difference in time has much relevance unless we test H4 or Daily data. That is because H4 and D1 data are influenced by 2 hours difference in time zone used, H1 and lower bars are not, so they should be the same. But they are not the same due to other reasons, such as different filtering, datafeed, etc. that all are different from broker to broker. But trading in real life is also different from broker to broker.

I think the important task would be to analyse the results of all the tests and look for solutions to make the EA more profitable. The ratio of profit trades is good, always above 66%. Albeit the ratio of average profit trade per loss trade is poor, the average loss trade is 2-3 times bigger than the profit trade.
So, to decrease the loss trades value and increase the profit trade value could help much. I tried to play with the settings but with not much success as I said in my post #239.

PS.: Due to Alpari's lower leverage (Alpari has 1:100 while IBFX has 1:200) Test4 with Lots=8 and Shinigami's test with MMRiskFactor=0.8; was not able to reproduce. This is also a reason for the different results.

Attached Files

DIN&Dolly_Alpari_M1_Test.rar (99.8 KB, 188 views)

Robert,
You are an amazing programmer, appreciate your work and I am testing V2
With this new Version do we need any extra indicators in our indicator folder compared to V1?
Tks
Berdj

Robert
I am trading DIN manually, and this is my updated notes on the system:
- Going with the trend and with Isakas, is not always a good idea, I got two open trades and the market went 85 pips against me (I did not close my trades) but eventually those turned to be profitable trades, as I got the sawp in my fav. Still those trades are open and I am collecting pips.
-Isakas sometimes gives false entry points, in a down or up trend when the market moves between feb. levels.. in this case I switch to look at higher time frames to see the trend and I draw the trend lines. Mainly avoid going with IsaKas signals against strong down or up trend.

- I found ASCT indicators they respond faster to the market they are not as good as Isakas for entry or exit, but the signals they gave is another good visual tool for the market movement.
Finally on a 2000$ account the best trades I found is to open 3 x .02 lots and target 40 pips.

There are lots of new traders who have no idea what we are talking about for those I suggest they start reading from this site first http://www.babypips.com/school/

__________________

MiniMe,

I agree about trading with the trend. That is what my backtest with v2 confirmed. I tested all the variations for checking trend with many different trend indicators and in all cases the EA did better when not using the trend for entry.

However using trend for exit did help a great deal. It kept the trades open longer. This also resulting in less trades.

Robert

Chrisstoff,
Using Alpari data will become a problem when backtesting version 2.x because the EA uses the 4 hour and Daily timeframes for trend exit by default.
Robert

I am attaching new versions of both EAs. The Zip file also contains the indicators used for iCustom. Any that appear to be missing, like FlatTrend, are coded as functions in the EAs.

I will keep version 1.x as pure Kuskus with added ideas and version 2.x as DIN.

FlatTrend did not help, at least with trading hours set to true.
No time to backtest more settings as I am busy with other EAs for pay.
I will continuue working with this EA as time allows.

I suppose next thing to add is MA cross on 30 minute for confirmation.
Also on Daily and 4 hr for trend.

I do not yet know how to set up the link to different messages for

Latest version of DIN_EAs is here.

I do know how to edit messages so maybe the best solution is to change the first message to point to this message. Then I will use this message to attach new zip files as changes are made.


Robert

Attached Files

DIN_EAs.zip (63.4 KB, 421 views)