The standard EA does seem to be making better money at the moment, unless I've done something stupid.
This EA uses the same strategy as the standard EA, from what I've seen the strategy just doesn't work.
Also, the thing that really puts me off is a lot of the posters in here seem to only post in this thread, that leads me to beleive that they are probably either the author or are being paid by the author to post fake reports.
This EA uses the same strategy as the standard EA, from what I've seen the strategy just doesn't work.
Also, the thing that really puts me off is a lot of the posters in here seem to only post in this thread, that leads me to beleive that they are probably either the author or are being paid by the author to post fake reports.
Funny. The standard strategy - for a cheap automated one - works just fine. The point of TMT is that you can tweak the system ease, and there is an extra check on the ADX or something (still no idea what that is). I don't think there was ever a promise of better profits. None of these systems are ever going to make you a millionaire unless you start with 900k in the first place.
.... it is the poorest performing EA in my account. I'm just not the sort of person who blindly follows the advice of others, if it doesn't make money, then it's gone, simple as that.
If I'm honest, this EA just isn't making any money for me. Too many consequetive losses in a row and the whole split profit taking just doesn't work out, it's more tthan likely the second part of the split gets stopped out as a loss.
I'm out..
I set the EA at 100 percent profit at 35, because of its seemingly much better live trading results.
In backtesting, Mark's setting seems more profitable, but, like you, I'm still skeptical.
However, Turbo earns its keep by screening out some losers that FMT trades.
no trade today