Here are their results based on a starting balance of 10,000:
a) Forex Autopilot on 1 Minute (M1) 2004.06.16 - 2008.07.22
Fixed size 1 lot; Performance +378%
Remark: In 2005, the EURUSD went from trending up to a 2000-pip drop. Trend-following system such as FAPS indeed suffered a loss of -28% but bounced back strongly in the subsequent years.
Fixed size 1 lot; Performance +277%
Remark: Despite having the full historical data, I was only able to generate backtest results from April 07 and I wondered why. I am really keen to find out how it faired with FAPS in 2005. (Has anyone seen its results?)
I) Fixed size 1 lot; Performance -100%
II) Variable lot size function (0.2 - 4.7); Performance +832%
Remark: Bogie went burst in 2005. Only with risk management in placed (i.e. by using its autolot feature) , Bogie survived the tough year of 2005 and performed particularly well in 2008.
14 comments:
Take a look on Forex Tracer backtests:
http://forex-systems-reviews.com/tracer_test.jpg
Its total crap.
Thanks, Nav. This confirmed all three EAs had a poor year in 2005.
Thanks, Lloyd. I appreciate the backtest/live trade updates for these EAs as well as the 10 Minute manual trading system.
Interesting link from Navigator, too. The Forex Tracer results don't surprise me. I'm still curious about the Forex Funnel, since the backtest on its site goes back to 2004. It's for the USDJPY, which is quite different from the EURUSD. However, the USDJPY has also gone through its share of trends, consolidation, high volatility, low volatility, etc., in the last 4 years.
Looking at the drawdowns (63% for FAPS, 77% for Bogie, anyone's gues for Tracer.), one other thing is clear to me. With real money, you'd need to (1) lower the leverage/risk for each EA and (2) trade multiple systems (some trend-following, some countertrend, etc.) to have a smoother equity curve and avoid high blod pressure!
FAPS and Bogie may have promise (especially if you optimitize Bogie every so often), but Tracer looks too one-dimensional for me.
Lloyd, in one of your earliest post you wrote:
Note 2: Performance Optimisation
I ran some simple tests - if we use a stop loss level in the region of 400 -500 pips, we should be able to match the system's no SL setup by aiming for consecutive winning trades. Using other amount less than that probably won't cut it.
Did you or would you try a 500pip SL back to 2004 to see what would have happened?
Also dear LLoyd you mislead the people by publishing Boogie results with Autolot enabled but FAPS without autolot.
As for me, FAP is my best choice. boogie is just a "short term" winner, in long term it does not work. Take a look on tests from
http://www.forex-robots.com
everybody can see that fap is real winner here after 2 months of live tests..
Hi guys, thanks for your input.
wnut: With 500 SL, FAPS performed +295% without going burst compared to +378 without SL. I can email the report for your reference.
nav: Bogie has also been evaluated under the fixed lot size condition. Performance graph added. William Boatright has indeed created a short-term winner.
Regarding FAPTS, I don't get its points by looking at Charle's own trading statements hidden in the FAQs. He shows FAPS results on main site but trade its own system.
I'm still wondering if anyone (including Boatright) has done a walk-forward backtest of Bogie, optimizing the parameters every month. It's a lot of work, but I think you have to do this. Average daily ranges (ADRs) change so much. The EURUSD's ADR went from about 150 pips/day in early 2004 to about 60 in the Fall of 2006. Right now it's somewhere between these levels.
I haven't considered FAPS because I hear so many different things about it and there are so many settings, variations, etc. Check out the reviews at www.forexpeacearmy.com or www.forextopten.com forexample. But I appreciate Navigator's input. Maybe there's hope if you stick to the recommendations of just one website or user's group.
One other note: on the www.forex-robots.com site, they're tracking Bogie Neural Network-1, not the current version (8) that Lloyd and most others are tracking.
After a little research, FAPS appears to have a couple of red flags:
(1) It sometimes buys at the top (like EURUSD at 1.6023)
(2) It holds on to some losing trades until they eat up the profits from winners.
Look at this official statement from FAPWinner.com.
http://fap-winner.com/ibfxreal/statement.htm
At the time I'm writing this (July 29), the loss on open positions (due to a 450 point drawdown on the 1.6023 EURUSD long trade) exceeds all the winners since mid-May.
I'm still skeptical...
For the record, I've held on to 500point drawdown trades before, but only when I used very small leverage and cost averaged my way back to a small win. And it was still gut-wrenching.
mkeys: I have acquired two versions of FAPS. The "universal" version seems to fair better than the updated version this month. Its last entered trade was 1.5771 long trade with 180 pip drawdown at this point. I also had similar experience with the 500pip drawdown trade previously. I'm going to run some optimisation tests etc. Watch out this space for more updates.
Thanks, Lloyd. 1.5771 isn't nearly as bad of an entry. I look forward to your tests and optimization.
If you purchase the EA, which version do you get? The updated?
I've just joined you tribe.
Cheers for the hard work.
Any ideas btw of what Finexo are like?
Thanks rob.
Oh - was reffering to this reviews here:
http://forex-brotherhood-reviews.com/
Post a Comment