After testing nearly 864 EAs over time, I’ve learned one important lesson: a great backtest doesn’t always mean a grea ...
After testing nearly 864 EAs over time, I’ve learned one important lesson: a great backtest doesn’t always mean a great EA.
I’ve tested many different systems, and only 2 EAs are ones I’m genuinely comfortable recommending.
What made these two different?
• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No risky Grid strategies
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Balanced risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance in different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward and live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Proper lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Performance that isn’t based on one lucky period
Over time, I stopped asking, “How much profit did the backtest make?”
Instead, I started asking:
“What happens when the market goes against the EA?”
That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.
The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the highest returns. They were the ones that gave me the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.
If you’re interested in knowing more about the two EAs, send me a message on Telegram: @victoradl |
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|