Forex Expert Advisors Turbo Robot an Unbiased Review ~ forex trading long term

7:50 PM in advisors, adx, an, based, developing, expert, first, following, Forex, my, non, review, robot, strategy, system, trend, turbo, unbiased

Today I found out a new robot which has been recently released into the forex automated trading arena. This trading system - called turbo-robot - promises to deliver consistent profits with unrivaled profitability, low draw downs, diversification and overall, just awesome results. Within this post I intend to review this trading system, specially the evidence provided by the author and whether or not this evidence is able to backup the authors claims of profitability. I will also look into this evidence and through my analysis tell you if I think the system has the potential to be long term profitable. After evaluating all these different aspects of the strategy I will then conclude my review by telling you whether or not this trading system is worth buying and testing. Is the turbo-robot up to the challenge of forex automated trading ? Lets see.

The turbo-robot website starts with the usual speech telling you how most robots suck but this robot is the best you will ever find. The author points out that the problem is that people should look for consistent profits and not systems that just make profits and then wipe accounts. Then when we turn to look at the evidence this system may have to prove that it is actually profitable we find nothing but the usual faulted tests.

This forex automated trading system offers backtesting results as the only proof of profitability. However not only does the author only offer these tests but the statements from the tests are not actually shown so things as simple as the actual time period of the tests, the average risk to rewards ratio, maximum draw down, etc, become absolutely useless. Then we are faced with something even worse which is the fact that the modeling quality of the tests is not 90% but n/a. This means that the simulations are not accurate since either 1 minute data was not used for modeling or a lot of mismatch errors occur within the test.

The author then shows us a part of the backtests which are supposed to be a part of the graphs shown. We do find that the system has a very favorable 1:5 risk to reward ratio which is absolutely great for any trading system. However since we do not have access to the actual backtesting statements it becomes absolutely impossible to determine whether or not this is the average risk to reward ratio or just the outcome of a few trades.

There is also an additional problem pointed out by the people at project4x which say that the backtesting results are NOT reproducible and that actual reproduction with 90% modeling quality generates nothing but loses. I think that this not surprising given the fact that the tests made available by the author of the turbo-robot website do show an n/a modeling quality pointing out that the results shown by them are the result of errors introduced within the data (or the lack of accurate data) and therefore their tests are nothing but meaningless and useless.

I believe that the people who setup this website and put up the tests are either very ignorant of how automated trading systems work and how to run simulations or they are doing an elaborate and conscious effort to deceive buyers. In either case the lack of any investor access verified live trading results and the lack of back testing statements does point out that the sellers are not being fully open but absolutely dishonest with the websites visitors. In the end, the overwhelming lack of any reliable evidence and the absolute lack of completness and accuracy of the evidence presented I consider this system NOT worth buying or testing. In the future, I would recommend the people at turbo-robot to consider their audience less retarded and do their homework regarding proper backtesting and the ABSOLUTELY necessary posting of FULL backtesting statements and investor access verified live trading results. If they are not willing to risk their own money on their own "wonderful" system, why should you ?

If you would like to learn more about my teachings in automated trading and how you too can design and trade your own long term profitable systems based on realistic profit and risk targets please consider buying my ebook on automated trading or joining Asirikuy to receive all ebook purchase benefits, weekly updates, check the live accounts I am running with several expert advisors and get in the road towards long term success in the forex market using automated trading systems. I hope you enjoyed the article !

forex trading long term

Read more

Trading a Martingale Based on Backtests A VERY Dangerous Road ~ forex trading help

9:40 PM in a, advantage, at, automated, backtests, based, dangerous, for, Forex, greatest, least, martingale, me, of, on, road, the, trading, very

During the past few months I have sadly seen a great increase in the number of Martingale systems flowing around on the internet and their use by new and inexperienced traders. I have also seen some people testing and using Martingale systems with great hope and some with what seem to be some very good results. Many of these people who use Martingales or systems with progressive money management seem to rely on backtesting results to test their theories and sometimes they claim that a 10 year backtest in which no wipeouts happen is "good enough" to consider a Martingale worth running on a live account since it is inherently "safe". Within the next few paragraphs you will see why this way of approaching Martingale trading is terribly dangerous and why people approaching trading in this manner are bound - sooner or later - to wipe out accounts and face the truth about progressive money management, in the end it never works.

The argument here seems to be pretty simple. You know that Martingale systems are dangerous but if you can get a 10 year backtests that shows no wipeouts it means that you are safe, right ? If during such a long trading period and such a varied array of market conditions your system survives then everything should be Okay. The truth is that there a few VERY large pitfalls to this approach.

The first problem with the backtesting of Martingale systems is that there is an inherent error in every backtesting result which can be explained in technical aspects of both the backtesting mechanism and the market itself. A 10 year backtest only gives you an approximation of the results during the past 10 years because - in reality - things like spread widening, requotes, broker differences and the absence of one minute interpolation would have made the results different to some extent.

In the case of Martingale and progressive money management systems the problem is that a very small error in the backtests can make the whole difference between wipeout and survival. Imagine that you have a Martingale system that wipes an account with 7 consecutive loses and the account achieves a maximum of 5 in a 10 year backtest. Now if the system only had 2 additional consecutive loses on any of those losing periods the account would have been wiped. While an addition of 2 consecutive loses to a given trading period for a trading system designed on sound principles is minimal, the effect on a Martingale or progressive money management system is bound to be devastating.

In the end the limitations of simulations make the "certainty of safeness" of any Martingale system a lie since the actual errors and limitations of the simulations are not only important but actually most likely determinant towards the evaluation of systems that are so sensitive to small increases in the number of consecutive loses. In reality, all trading systems are bound to be facing anything between one to three times the number of consecutive loses they have given in historical testing and this makes progressive money management systems always reach wipeouts in real trading.

To sum it up, using Martingales based on backtesting is a VERY dangerous thing to do due to the limitations of the simulations. In the end, ALL martingales are bound to wipe their accounts in the long term. This is a statistical certainty which does not change, no matter what short term results show or what simulations may appear to be telling you. It comes back to the old saying, there are bold and old traders but there are no old bold traders.

If you would like to learn more about the development of trading systems and how you too can design and trade your own systems based on sound money management techniques please consider buying my ebook on automated trading or joining Asirikuy to receive all ebook purchase benefits, weekly updates, check the live accounts I am running with several expert advisors and get in the road towards long term success in the forex market using automated trading systems. I hope you enjoyed the article !

forex trading help

Read more

Volume Based Forex Systems Can it be Done ~ forex trading games

4:06 PM in an, article, asian, based, be, can, currency, done, exploiting, forex, inefficiency, it, latest, magazine, my, session, systems, trader, volume

When you analyze the forex market one of the first things that becomes clear is that the finding of true volume information is very hard if not actually impossible. Since the forex market has no central exchange it would require a person to track all of the largest banks in the worlds in order to know the real volume and magnitude of the transactions being done. Doing this in a real-time fashion to get volume data like that of stocks or futures would be a gigantic task that would most likely be frustrated by the complexity and "disorganized" nature of the foreign exchange market. So the question becomes, is there any way to measure volume ? is there any way to design a system based on volume information ? During this post I will share with you some of what I have learned about this problem and the best solutions that we have to tackle this issue.

Even though there is no such thing as a source of true volume information in forex trading, we could find a property that is correlated with trading volume which allows us to trade it in a way similar to how we would actually trade "true volume". The only property which has been studied extensively and which does show a strong correlation with true volume (at least we know this from other markets) is the tick number which corresponds to the number of times price is refreshed on your trading platform. This means that if during an hour there are 50 price quotes, then this hour is bound to have much less volume than an hour where there are 1000 price quotes.

Our problem here would be to use this tick volume information in a manner that is as less broker dependent as possible. Since different brokers have different feeds, filtering and liquidity providers it becomes impossible to actually use values of absolute volume as the starting point of any given trading strategy. A system that would attempt to use tick volume absolute values would certainly fail since these values are totally broker dependent and there is no way in which they can be related with actual market inefficiencies.

However the most interesting part comes when we realize that tick volume does go into predictable cycles and that we could build an indicator that normalizes this values so that we can have an "oscillator" that describes tick volume movement relative to the past X bars. This indicator would be similar to the stochastic oscillator used on price charts with the difference that it would use tick volume data. The oscillator would move to high regions when we are trading near the volume tick high of the past X periods and to low regions when we are trading near tick volume lows. By obtaining volume information that is relative and does not rely on the absolute tick volume values of the instrument we are trading we can make sure that broker dependency would be diminished and the design of profitable trading systems could start to happen.

Such an indicator could be used in several ways to find and exploit possible inefficiencies. For example, we could trade breakouts when volume drops below a certain oscillator threshold or we could attempt to trade continuations whenever there a price action movement with enough tick volume towards a given side. We could in fact also use volume information to find meaningful situations where patterns that would normally not be very interesting become relevant when they happen within the high regions of the tick volume oscillator.
-
-
Certainly it is important to see that although there is no exact true volume information in forex the fact that we do have tick volume information and the fact that this tick volume is proportional to true market volume could allow us to develop successful systems since we have a totally new dimension of information which we dont have when we look exclusively at price charts. However it is very important here to realize that normalization of tick volume information is necessary in order to avoid broker dependency and such other problems that would make system development with absolute tick volume information a total nightmare.

The article right after mine on the last issue of currency trader magazine explores the use of some tick volume information and indicators for the development of long term profitable strategies showing that this indeed can be done, leading to very interesting results. Now it is my turn to see if Metatrader 4 is up to the task :o)

If you would like to learn more about automated trading and how you too can develop your own likely long term profitable systems please consider joining Asirikuy.com, a website filled with educational videos, trading systems, development and a sound, honest and transparent approach to trading systems. I hope you enjoyed this article ! :o)

forex trading games

Read more

Why There is No Universal System Differences Between Currency Pairs ~ forex trading glossary

4:03 AM in a, backtests, based, between, currency, dangerous, differences, Forex, is, martingale, no, on, pairs, road, system, there, trading, universal, very, why

Can we build a system that trades successfully on all forex currency pairs ? This has often been a question of the automated trading system world that simply asks if there is a universal inefficiency, an inefficiency that is so common that it can be found an exploited on all different currency pairs. Up until now, the answer to this question has been a resounding and unequivocal NO. To the best of my knowledge no system has ever been developed to work on all currency pairs despite the claims of many system sellers who tell you that you can use their systems on all of them. But why has it been impossible to build such a system ? Why does trading all currency pairs seems like such a big challenge ? The answer lies within the very fabric of the market and the way in which the different currency pairs trade and react. Within the following paragraphs I will explain to you some of the basic aspects of these currency pair differences and why it makes the creation of any universal system extremely hard if not impossible.

You may have been told that inefficiencies in the market arise due to crowd behavior- which is a human characteristic- and that all currency pairs in forex show it to some degree. When you hear this it becomes easy to think that if a system "really works" then it is bound to work on absolutely all the instruments available in the currency market. After all, every instrument is bought and sold by humans and this would make them inherently inefficient.

Certainly if all instruments traded with the exact same number of people and with the exact same objectives we would be able to easily find a universal inefficiency but the matter of fact is that this is not the case. The first dramatic difference between instruments is the number of participants and the inherent liquidity of each currency pair. Some pairs like the EUR/USD are very liquid while others like the GBP/CHF dont have 1/10th of the liquidity of the former so their price action is dramatically different and the inefficiencies within it become dramatically different. The less people who trade a given pair, the more efficient it becomes since crowd behavior becomes less pronounced and individual decisions start to play important roles.

Then we have other differences that also make the movements of currency pairs different. For example if you are trading the USD/JPY and there is a negative trade balance against Japan then there will be a given fixed amount of money each month that will pull the USD against the JPY just merely because of business transactions that have nothing to do with speculation. The volume of these transactions is very significant and the time in which they are processed and their magnitude will have an impact on the way in which a pair moves.

Many other factors such as central bank intervention and even cultural differences play an important role in the way in which a pair moves when compared to another and all of these factors help to explain why the finding of universal inefficiencies is so hard. However when you look at higher time frames (daily and beyond) there seems to be some coherence and this is the reason why some systems that target month or year long trends manage to exploit the same inefficiency on several different currency pairs. However the success of these systems along the whole portfolio is never total and more often than not there are very strong differences between the profitability of different currency pairs and several pairs where the systems simply do not work.

So will we ever find a global and total inefficiency ? I would have to say that probably no, but if there is a chance it will take a lot more liquidity on all instruments and a lot more market participants to make this the case. Certainly in the future if the market volume on the illiquid currency pairs increases enough we might be able to have - even though not a truly universal system - at least systems that will have better success along different currency pairs.

If you would like to learn more about system development and how you too can build your own likely long term profitable systems based on sound trading tactics please consider buying my ebook on automated trading or joining Asirikuy to receive all ebook purchase benefits, weekly updates, check the live accounts I am running with several expert advisors and get in the road towards long term success in the forex market using automated trading systems. I hope you enjoyed the article !

forex trading glossary

Read more

Easy Profit in Automated Trading Logical Proof of its Nonexistence ~ forex trading fundamentals

3:13 AM in a, automated, based, clear, easy, example, forex, in, its, logical, nonexistence, nvo, of, profit, proof, tick, trading, using, volume

Isnt hassle free profit from the forex market all we want ? Definitely the goal of every person that starts to look for an expert advisor - or most at least - is to find a trading system they can simply "set and forget", a trading system that just collects money from the market in a consistent manner with minimal or limited draw down. A "holy grail", so to speak. However, it becomes obvious after a while of being in this business that if it is too good to be true it probably is and that no trading system can provide the owner with profit without an effort to develop knowledge and understanding. However the fact that the other road seems plausible makes a lot of people continue to search for this nonexistent trading system, a quest that brings nothing but disappointment and financial loss for most new traders. On todays post I will be giving you a logic based demonstration that shows why easy profit in automated trading is impossible and why this search is meaningless and will never arrive at your intended result (a system that easily gets you money without any effort).

First of all we must understand the very basic aspects about logic based demonstrations. When we are faced with a given hypothesis there are several ways in which it can be demonstrated to be true. In mathematics this is done in several ways but one of them is of particular interest to my article. You can demonstrate that something is false if the assumption that it is true leads to absurd results. For example, let us test the hypothesis that the addition of two even numbers gives us an odd number (which is false).

Assuming this to be true :

n, m and k are integers (2n is the definition of an even number, 2k+1, the definition of an odd one)

2n+2m = 2k+1
2n+2m-2k = 1 subtract 2k from both sides
2(n+m-k) = 1 factor 2 out
2a = 1 since n, m and -k are integers their addition is another integer (a)

Since 2a is an even number by definition and it is said to be equal to 1, we have an absurd result. No integer times 2 is able to give us 1 as a result. The hypothesis has been proved false because the assumptions that it is true leads to absurd results.

When it comes to making money from a system without any effort we can do the exact same thing. Let us suppose that there is a system that generates a 200% yearly income which can be traded from 100 USD and used successfully by anyone who buys it. Looking into the sales of the most popular experts we could expect this system to be used by at least 30K people during the first 2 years. This means that 300K USD - assuming each person trades the minimum - will be traded within the first 2 years. After ten years the return of this system would have been 17714700000 which is around 17 billion which is above all other market participants for this same time period. If 300K USD were added each year (of course new sales), the results would be even more staggering nearing more than 100 billion USD.

After 20 years, results become even more absurd and the system is now making a return that would be equal to more than the volume available to be traded. That is, all other market participants would be losing money against this system. This reduces the result to absurd levels since the systems profits surpass the amount of money available from the market. In fact, all the money in the world roughly describes what this system would be making.

The conclusions of this thought experiment are therefore quite simple and straightforward. One of the following things must be true :

• If a successful system exists that anyone can trade then there is an inherent - and quite small - volume limitation to its trading that will thereafter make it lose its profitability or its "tradable by anyone" character.
• If a successful mechanical system exists then there must be strong psychological barriers that make it extremely hard to trade for most market participants
• If a successful mechanical system exists then there is bound to be a maximum compounded yearly profit to maximum draw down limitation that forbids it from reaching the above scenario (a limitation on profits).

Through all my research and work I have found that it is certainly possible to have successful mechanical trading systems and I suspect all the above are in fact true statements. Systems that would be easily available for anyone to use would quickly lose this character as a function of volume and become hard to trade for some reason (psychological, increases in the maximum draw down to average compounded yearly profit ratio) and systems that are already successful are bound to be hard to trade or have an inherent profitability limitation that does not allow them to reach the above mentioned scenario.

In the end, logic is simply undeniable. The scenario portrayed before is an absurd outcome that cannot be reached and therefore limitations to its achievement must be contained within the systems themselves. Systems that may seem to show extremely high results must be volume limited and later become much less profitable and harder to trade while mechanical systems that are profitable in the long term are hard to trade by definition. The above logical reasoning also shows us that there is bound to be some form of profitability to draw down limitation which comes from the simple assumption that the above scenario must be avoided. In conclusion, there is simply no easy long term profit in automated trading.

As you see, the simple power of the "reduction to absurdity" logical reasoning allows us to gain a lot of information about the world of automated trading systems merely by the use of a very simple thought experiment. If you have any comments, suggestions, opinions or other similar reasoning exercises, please feel free to leave a comment !

If you would like to learn more about my journey in automated trading and gain a true education around this type of systems, their uses, limitations and possibilities please consider joining Asirikuy.com, a website filled with educational videos, trading systems, development and a sound, honest and transparent approach to trading systems. I hope you enjoyed this article ! :o)

forex trading fundamentals

Read more