Thread: What works, and what doesnt

After the instance is forex, everything works, until is doesn't...!

Slow grind is where it needs to be shorted. But there's always possibility of grind zone will likely be broken up and it'll hunt you as shorted
when you wait for it to break then brief where will provide you greater risk reward ratio then it might be the start of impulsive reverse move

you can never know what's going to follow the spike. Some short it it. Most works then one day it hunt you poor

Originally Posted by ;

I've done backtests of numerous systems trying to find what works and what does not work. The one thing I found is market likes to be efficient and does not like quick moves that are highly inefficient. Market likes to range 75% of the time So these quick inefficient moves often have faded back into range. This is what my research has shown. In case you have other study consisting of 1000 back tests in all market conditions please discuss! I am looking for evidence of what works and what does not. Please post any study of 1000 backtests...

Originally Posted by ;

quote If you think these 5 points do not work, you're obviously at the commencement of your trading learning process. What does not work for you isn't necessary true for everyone...

I have exactly the very same feelings for example bloodpoodle, does it work for you FerruFX?

For me the best is good flag pattern, supply ressistance, SR zones functions 50 / 50.

Originally Posted by ;

I have done backtests of numerous systems hoping to find what works and what does not work. ....

There is no AI yet available for trading. Humans with all their emotions are heavily involved in gambling. . .and eventually without understanding investing itself there is not any way for consistent success in trading...I could be wrong on this particular subject, but that is my opinion.

Bloodpoole so when do you enter? Where's your sl? and Tp ?

Originally Posted by ;

I have done backtests of numerous systems hoping to find what works and what does not work. The one thing I discovered is market likes to be efficient and does not like quick moves which are highly unsuccessful. Market likes to range 75% of the time So these quick inefficient moves often get faded right back into range. That is what my research has shown. If you've got other study comprising 1000 back evaluations in most market conditions please discuss! I am searching for statistical proof of what works and what doesn't. Please post any study of 1000 backtests...

market structure absolutely important thing, but announcement do not work on several listed mention above need careful. First significance do not get the job done and work. The way the job? Maybe should understanding about the significance work. Hammer absolutely not work to saw out a timber, to saw we need a saw

Originally Posted by ;

....but strictly speaking it isn't possible to tell from backtesting what works and what does not: only what worked and what didn't. The tense is quite significant.... That may, by definition, come only from forward testing.

I have read this kind of remark a while before, but -- unless it is referring to the fact that backtests don't correctly take (what is currently unknown) prices and slippage into account; or any dangers involved with curve fitting a method to maximize its performance over past data -- I must respectfully disagree, since (everything else being equal) any forward test that has been started X days past (as well as now ) will yield the very same entries and exits, and so P/L, as a backtest that's conducted now across precisely the same period.

To whatever extent backtesting is impotent because markets change their color over time, and therefore past data does not reflect what will happen henceforth, forward testing is so, because your forward testing has likewise been conducted over what is currently historic data.

Newbie talk!!!! And nothing more ! This thread has to be in rookie talk! Plz some one report it. Thx!!

Originally Posted by ;

3. Over complied systems.

.... And also systems which are easy enough to be egorized into an EA.

Between 2009-2012 I coded possibly 20-30 EAs by handpicking the seemingly best ideas from the dozens of requests I received from (sometimes, the most highly followed)nigeriaforextradingassociates, who all insisted that their egies were more profitable. When this proved not to be the situation, I modified these EAs, including their ideas for filters to eliminate entry signals that resulted in losses, distinct SLs, TPs, trailing stops, MMs.... You name it. As far as I know, NONE of those EAs are still being run now, a complete waste of time for everybody involved.

Hence I think it's safe to say to anyone that if your system is straightforward enough to be egorized within an EA, then it almost certainly will not be long-term profitable. However you slice it, an expert human trader will always have more intellect than the most complex EA.

And, it also stands to reason that if the markets could be conquered by one, objectively definable system, that everybody would use such a system. Subsequently, since there should finally be a willing seller for each buyer, markets would either cease to exist (LOL), or would always adapt in such a way as to make the system unprofitable. That's one reason IMHO profitable retail trading involves nuanced knowledge -- and rather knowledge that's somehow grounded in how heavyweight forces are currently driving price. A simple TA-based system can stay profitable only in so far as it exploits heavyweight-generated inefficiencies whose uniformity and repeatability could be guaranteed to last during the lifetime of this system.

1 Attachment(s)

Originally Posted by ;

turned into a great november here! image