For the last few days I have been aggressively looking at, analyzing and reviewing trading systems I have come up with. The most recent system I found is called Winalot which is sold by the easy-ea.com company. This post will therefore be dedicated at the exhaustive review of this expert advisor through the evidence offered by the creators on their website.
Well, I can say that they easy-ea website is pretty much one of the simplest websites I have ever seen regarding commercial expert advisors, not a lot of hype and cutting straight to the evidence. They offer back testing and presumably live testing information. Their back testing is done year by year and goes back up until 2007 which I find pretty odd given the fact that his system could have been easily backtested from 1999. Since the market changed completely between 2006 and 2009 it is not surprise that they may have omitted previously unprofitable trading periods.
The expert advisor also offers a forward testing statement from December 2008 to date which is something you could say impressive for a commercial expert advisor. After nearly a year of trading they achieve a profit near 50% which I consider reasonable for a forex automated trading system. Now, the backtesting should be at least an indicative of performance since position sizes are higher than 20 pips which should make interpolation errors small. When comparing live and forward testing you do see discrepancies which could be because both the feed and the EA opening trades within bars rather than based on bar closing values. The system underestimates draw down a lot when you compare statements. For example, backtesting says only 3 losing trades happened in March 2009 while you see 5 on live testing. Of course, the profit targets in backtesting are too unrealistic because of some artifact of the expert's logic (such as the opening of positions I just mentioned) but the live testing statements seem to achieve reasonable profit targets with reasonable draw downs. Given the fact that the risk to reward ratio is 2:1, which is borderline acceptable for me, I would say that this system could be worth testing if we had a way to confirm long term profitability since 2000.
However, since they fail to provide us with this data for some reason and we can only know the EA is profitable under 2009 conditions I am inclined to say that there is not sufficient data for this EA to be tested and used by us. The creators should modify the EA to make backtesting reliable so that we could have a measure of adaptability and consistency. While this happens I will have to say that this EA is not worth trading because there is not enough evidence of it's longer term profitability. However I certainly applaud the author's drive to provide long term live testing and backtesting information.
If you would like to learn about free long term stable profitable trading systems and how you can too start earning money in the forex market using trading systems please consider buying my ebook on automated trading or subscribing to my weekly newsletter to receive updates and check the live and demo accounts I am running with several expert advisors. I hope you enjoyed this article !
Well, I can say that they easy-ea website is pretty much one of the simplest websites I have ever seen regarding commercial expert advisors, not a lot of hype and cutting straight to the evidence. They offer back testing and presumably live testing information. Their back testing is done year by year and goes back up until 2007 which I find pretty odd given the fact that his system could have been easily backtested from 1999. Since the market changed completely between 2006 and 2009 it is not surprise that they may have omitted previously unprofitable trading periods.
The expert advisor also offers a forward testing statement from December 2008 to date which is something you could say impressive for a commercial expert advisor. After nearly a year of trading they achieve a profit near 50% which I consider reasonable for a forex automated trading system. Now, the backtesting should be at least an indicative of performance since position sizes are higher than 20 pips which should make interpolation errors small. When comparing live and forward testing you do see discrepancies which could be because both the feed and the EA opening trades within bars rather than based on bar closing values. The system underestimates draw down a lot when you compare statements. For example, backtesting says only 3 losing trades happened in March 2009 while you see 5 on live testing. Of course, the profit targets in backtesting are too unrealistic because of some artifact of the expert's logic (such as the opening of positions I just mentioned) but the live testing statements seem to achieve reasonable profit targets with reasonable draw downs. Given the fact that the risk to reward ratio is 2:1, which is borderline acceptable for me, I would say that this system could be worth testing if we had a way to confirm long term profitability since 2000.
However, since they fail to provide us with this data for some reason and we can only know the EA is profitable under 2009 conditions I am inclined to say that there is not sufficient data for this EA to be tested and used by us. The creators should modify the EA to make backtesting reliable so that we could have a measure of adaptability and consistency. While this happens I will have to say that this EA is not worth trading because there is not enough evidence of it's longer term profitability. However I certainly applaud the author's drive to provide long term live testing and backtesting information.
If you would like to learn about free long term stable profitable trading systems and how you can too start earning money in the forex market using trading systems please consider buying my ebook on automated trading or subscribing to my weekly newsletter to receive updates and check the live and demo accounts I am running with several expert advisors. I hope you enjoyed this article !
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment