EZG - live! Tartışma

can i have information of your system?

You need to show us at least your initial deposit. If it was only say $100 then your results would most probably be a random pot shot of EA's , lets say 100 of which this one so happened to work. If the deposit wast at least $2000 then it would be significant . The system must also survive longer than six months at least. If you keep growing it at this rate you will corner the entire forex market within a few years ... so something is amiss. Hiding your details is problematic , but not unreasonable to avoid reverse engineering. Your broker https://www.ibfx.com/ is legit, not some banana bucketshop from Bulgaria but an actual broker from the USA '....The company is regulated as a Forex Dealer Member by the National Futures Association (NFA) and is also registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as a Futures Commission Merchant (CFTC).....'

So one would follow your progress with interest. The first sign of a scam would be you trying to sell an EA. Anybody who sells an EA is automatically a fraud, they don't work. They are sold by ruthless dishonest people selling people a pipe dream. If you are really this good and can perhaps articulate something sensible in American English and not Bulgarian Boris or Boomer English you will get PAMM investors.

If you are unfortunately a Russian or from Afghanistan or some other banana country, then please get somebody to check your grammar before posting a PAMM service . Native speakers of English automatically filter out schemes from Boris, Doris and Boomer. If you use an alias, then please don't call yourself Boris. Alpari.co.uk fabricated a demo account with 220 winners out of 223 in order to game myfxbook.com and buy themselves free advertisement. Guess what was the alias used by the poster .....

Best of luck!

ciccio,

perhaps u might make your ba;lance info pub;lic/.

good ;luck,

zero/.

You win rate is only 55% , this is to low. It must be at least 70%

Best Trade(pips): (Aug 02) 252.4
Worst Trade(pips): (Aug 13) -96.

The longer a position is held open the larger the 'random luck factor' becomes. Nobody can predict the future and history never repeats itself. With trading there is a small window to exploit certain repeating patterns. You wold indeed have to have very large winning positions such as 252 pips due to your poor win rate of 55% .

In my view anything over 100 pips becomes purely a random lucky event due to the length of time it would take.

Due to your poor win rate and only three month trading history your account will blow within the next three months or stagnate, if this won't happen then most likely the account is a fabrication by ibfx.com to buy themselves free advertisement. We don't know it remains to be seen, anything is possible.

Take for example the top systems at www.zulutrade.com with a 12 month trading history, filter them to only look at their last three months and you will note that for some reason the equity is either flat or declining. In other words their sterling performance the previous nine months was most probably a lucky event from thousands of systems there will always be a few that generates a good return for a few months but then starts failing. One should ideally have a system of at least two years with month on month of positive equity growth, just one month of declining growth would be a red flag.

Most probably this is a $100 account one of 2000 that runs an EA, there will form time to time due to random luck be one of these accounts that will post 900% gain over four months. But over 12 months impossible because new fundamental factors takes mankind on a different trajectory: History never ever repeats itself because each generation has entirely new factors such as computers, nano tech, natural disasters etc.

Helicopter Ben announced a new round of QE, taking the euro through the roof. No amount of technical analysis could have predicted this. It had nothing to do with technicals, it was a fundamental historical event. Bernanke didn't look up fib ratios or Elliot waves, he made a fundamental decision based on fundamental factors.

Stephanus your posts always make interesting reading. However you're turning into the little boy who cried wolf.

Not every account that is doing well is automatically created by the broker in order to attract clients.
I've been in touch Jack and he manages accounts and he's happy for you to run on any MT4 broker. So, that debunks that theory.

Maybe rather than just throw out your list of standard scams at people you could do some due diligence first. You know the old 'Ask questions, shoot later' routine?

On the issue of 70% success rate. I have a strategy on EurUsd that is only right 12% of the time but has a risk/reward ratio of 1/10. Currently up 247 pips after nine months and 70 trades.

stevetrade posted:
Stephanus your posts always make interesting reading.
Not every account that is doing well is automatically created by the broker in order to attract clients.
I've been in touch Jack and he manages accounts and he's happy for you to run on any MT4 broker. So, that debunks that theory.

Maybe rather than just throw out your list of standard scams at people you could do some due diligence first. You know the old 'Ask questions, shoot later' routine?

Since the account holder makes the claims it is up to him to make everything public, he needs to provide a way for his claims to be falsified .
https://groups.google.com/group/futures-trading/t/2ecad27b1e1aa13b

I will though concede that making an account public is not always a good thing to due to the fact that the system could be reverse engineered. Which is why I proposed a series of factors or ratio's that will quantify the risk:reward ratio as per
https://groups.google.com/group/futures-trading/t/feaf8edc016b8a0a

Richard Dawkins chided people for their 'fallacy of incredulity' . David Berlinski replied ' .... In appealing to the animidversions of
others, he appeals to his own ability to believe almost anything ....'

Any nonsense can be posted to a website, it is really only that audited tax return that counts. Making 900% is meaningless if we can't determine the risk that went into the trades, were they gambled or engineered.

He made his broker public and you accused him of being IBFX promoting themselves. Not sure what else he could make public to disprove this possibility.

As I stated, I have been in touch with Jack and he allows his clients to use any MT4 account. Therefore he obviously isn't IBFX.

As I said, if you did some due diligence first. i.e. by asking Jack some questions about his account then you could discount from your list of possible scams all the ones that don't fit and then you could accuse him of those.

As it stands you approach is exactly what I would perceive as 'The boy who cried wolf'. In that you aren't even bothering to make sure there is a wolf there first.

This approach leads people to discount pretty much everything you say. Which is a shame, because as I said. Your posts make interesting reading.

stephanusR posted:
    You need to show us at least your initial deposit. ...... not some banana bucketshop from Bulgaria but an actual broker from the USA '....The company is regulated as a Forex Dealer Member by the National Futures Association (NFA) and is also registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as a Futures Commission Merchant (CFTC).....'

it is *really* good to know what you write... and simply *think* and do some research
the regulation in Bulgaria are tighter than these in UK for example (and than these in US as well)

about 'just think' - are you serious that you can not calculate what is his initial deposit??? it is on *every* row
lol