[Joseph Oluwaseun]

I’ve tested almost 864 EAs over time, and one thing I’ve learned is that a high backtest profit doesn’t automatically mean an EA is good.

Out of all the EAs I’ve tested, there are only 2 I’m comfortable recommending.

What made them different?

• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No dangerous Grid
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Reasonable risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance across different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward/live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Doesn’t depend on one lucky period

I stopped judging EAs by “how much profit did the backtest make?”

The better question is:

“How does it behave when the market stops going its way?”

That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.

The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest returns. They were the ones that showed the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.

[Joseph Oluwaseun]

I’ve tested almost 864 EAs over time, and one thing I’ve learned is that a high backtest profit doesn’t automatically mean an EA is good.

Out of all the EAs I’ve tested, there are only 2 I’m comfortable recommending.

What made them different?

• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No dangerous Grid
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Reasonable risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance across different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward/live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Doesn’t depend on one lucky period

I stopped judging EAs by “how much profit did the backtest make?”

The better question is:

“How does it behave when the market stops going its way?”

That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.

The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest returns. They were the ones that showed the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.

[Joseph Oluwaseun]

I’ve tested almost 864 EAs over time, and one thing I’ve learned is that a high backtest profit doesn’t automatically mean an EA is good.

Out of all the EAs I’ve tested, there are only 2 I’m comfortable recommending.

What made them different?

• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No dangerous Grid
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Reasonable risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance across different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward/live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Doesn’t depend on one lucky period

I stopped judging EAs by “how much profit did the backtest make?”

The better question is:

“How does it behave when the market stops going its way?”

That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.

The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest returns. They were the ones that showed the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.

[Joseph Oluwaseun]

I’ve tested almost 864 EAs over time, and one thing I’ve learned is that a high backtest profit doesn’t automatically mean an EA is good.

Out of all the EAs I’ve tested, there are only 2 I’m comfortable recommending.

What made them different?

• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No dangerous Grid
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Reasonable risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance across different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward/live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Doesn’t depend on one lucky period

I stopped judging EAs by “how much profit did the backtest make?”

The better question is:

“How does it behave when the market stops going its way?”

That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.

The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest returns. They were the ones that showed the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.

[Joseph Oluwaseun]

I’ve tested almost 864 EAs over time, and one thing I’ve learned is that a high backtest profit doesn’t automatically mean an EA is good.

Out of all the EAs I’ve tested, there are only 2 I’m comfortable recommending.

What made them different?

• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No dangerous Grid
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Reasonable risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance across different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward/live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Doesn’t depend on one lucky period

I stopped judging EAs by “how much profit did the backtest make?”

The better question is:

“How does it behave when the market stops going its way?”

That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.

The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest returns. They were the ones that showed the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.

[Joseph Oluwaseun]

 

I’ve tested almost 864 EAs over time, and one thing I’ve learned is that a high backtest profit doesn’t automatically mean an EA is good.

Out of all the EAs I’ve tested, there are only 2 I’m comfortable recommending.

What made them different?

• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No dangerous Grid
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Reasonable risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance across different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward/live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Doesn’t depend on one lucky period

I stopped judging EAs by “how much profit did the backtest make?”

The better question is:

“How does it behave when the market stops going its way?”

That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.

The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest returns. They were the ones that showed the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.

 

[Joseph Oluwaseun]

I’ve tested almost 864 EAs over time, and one thing I’ve learned is that a high backtest profit doesn’t automatically mean an EA is good.

Out of all the EAs I’ve tested, there are only 2 I’m comfortable recommending.

What made them different?

• Predefined SL & TP
• No Martingale
• No dangerous Grid
• Proper risk management
• Controlled drawdown
• Reasonable risk-to-reward
• Consistent performance across different market conditions
• Realistic backtesting
• Forward/live testing
• Spread & slippage protection
• News filter
• Trading session filter
• Lot-size control
• Daily loss protection
• Maximum trade limits
• No unlimited averaging down
• Stable equity curve
• Doesn’t depend on one lucky period

I stopped judging EAs by “how much profit did the backtest make?”

The better question is:

“How does it behave when the market stops going its way?”

That’s where most of the 864 EAs I tested failed.

The two I kept weren’t necessarily the ones with the biggest returns. They were the ones that showed the best balance between profitability, consistency, and risk control.

[Author]

Posts