600K Expert Advisor CT$F0REX

[PyeR2]

http://a.imageshack.us/img137/6987/cts4x.jpg

 

Found this EA on ebay with a US$600,000 price tag. It belongs to www.ct$for3x.com.

The reality is that they are really selling a managed account service.

They actually provide investor login to their demo accounts which overall look alright. If you download the file below it will give you all the details.

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?l70gi3tmc3yin

 

It is actually a bundle of 5 EA's and they all have a T.P. which is >2X the S.L. (S.L's are arounf 120pips)

I can't see why these accounts couldn't be copied with a trade copier if you wanted to. Given the large S.L. & T.P they are a perfect candidate.

 

Enjoy, Pye.

[Abdulisback]

Man, his systems are worth less than 6$ to be honest,, and I would never trade it.

 

I have actually subscribed to his worthless service for two weeks. I paid for his UsdChf two weeks subscription, and gave him a Demo account to set-up his EA on.

 

When winsor tells you that his system uses a 120 pips stoploss he is actually lying, his system almost immediately buys as soon as a 120 stoploss for the previous buy position is hit... which means that his system is not actually using any stoploss!

 

I subscribed during a UsdChf over 700 pips collapse, the EA kept buying all through out that pair collapse..

 

so the RiskReward Ratio is really bad on this one,,, actually just ask that scumbag to post his backtests going back to 1999. He simply won't because his EA WILL blow-up the account no matter what settings he uses.

[PyeR2]

I agree that they are are not the greatest, but overall if traded as a basket they seem to be profitable at least at this point in time. I thought the subscription got you the the whole basket, certainly very expensive if it's 'per bot'. Anyway if you copy the accounts they are free.

 

http://a.imageshack.us/img828/5383/siennaeurusd.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img821/1088/mellisausdchf.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img339/6411/leaheurusd.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img230/7290/jasmineeurusd.jpg

http://a.imageshack.us/img716/1623/haleygbpusd.jpg

[Abdulisback]

dude! what is the point you're trying to make here? the EA is similar to any other EA that does not use a stoploss.

 

Ask the vendor to provide you with a backtest starting from 1999, he won't! you know why? because it blows up the account.

 

The EA uses wide stoplosses and targets, so backtesting on 90% modeling quality will give very accurate representation.

[PyeR2]

I thought the point was pretty obvious - you only traded one EA on 1 pair for two weeks which hardly seems long enough for you to be making a sweeping judgment about all 5 EA's. These forward tests are over 3 months which is still not very long but a bit more reasonable than 2 weeks.

What point are you trying to make in your 2nd post that you didn't make in your 1st post? I understand you're bitter because you lost money but that's no excuse to get hostile.

The fact is most EA's are junk and will fail, this forum is a testament to that. The thing about these EA's that interested me enough to make the effort to share was the fact that the TP is >2X the SL. This is extremely rare for an EA. I take on board the point you make in your 1st post about the EA re-entering soon after a loss. Maybe the other 4 EA's do this too, maybe they don't. I know we have seen 2 major reversals on all the USD pairs over the last 3 months so if they just traded 1 way they would most likely all be toast by now.

I wont be asking the vendor for back-tests or anything else as I'm not interested in trading them. I made the post so people could assess the information for themselves and if they are interested use a trade copier.

[halcyonn]

PyeR2 has a point as well but i must mention it here that there are better ea's than this dubious quad.the top performer has a PF of 1.36 and worse 0.82 which is actually losing money over all.even if we average winning ones and losing ones we get just barely above PF of 1.not a performance i would advocate for.

[expat1967]

HAHAHA.

 

600k for that junk?

 

im beginning to think trading isnt the way to make a living in this industry, it to sell s*** systems to suckers...

 

Yeap, and low to none risk/investment based.

 

Not discountable, not refundable and let me guess not profitable ;)

 

How many 100 Years would it take to return such an investment if it does at all...

 

Cheers

[Abdulisback]

I thought the point was pretty obvious - you only traded one EA on 1 pair for two weeks which hardly seems long enough for you to be making a sweeping judgment about all 5 EA's. These forward tests are over 3 months which is still not very long but a bit more reasonable than 2 weeks.

What point are you trying to make in your 2nd post that you didn't make in your 1st post? I understand you're bitter because you lost money but that's no excuse to get hostile.

The fact is most EA's are junk and will fail, this forum is a testament to that. The thing about these EA's that interested me enough to make the effort to share was the fact that the TP is >2X the SL. This is extremely rare for an EA. I take on board the point you make in your 1st post about the EA re-entering soon after a loss. Maybe the other 4 EA's do this too, maybe they don't. I know we have seen 2 major reversals on all the USD pairs over the last 3 months so if they just traded 1 way they would most likely all be toast by now.

I wont be asking the vendor for back-tests or anything else as I'm not interested in trading them. I made the post so people could assess the information for themselves and if they are interested use a trade copier.

 

 

 

No, its not about me losing money in this,, I only paid 15$ as far as I remember for two weeks trial, and traded on demo,, so I did not lose any money.

 

I always get pissed off at systems that don't use a stoploss or use a ridicules risk/reward ratio. and systems based on progressive positioning and martingales,, all these are distended to fail.

 

What I find even more irritating here is you not wanting to understand that this system does not use a stoploss. This means the risk/reward ratio is NOT 1:2... it could be more like unlimited.

The 1:2 Risk/Reward ratio is what that scumbag Vendor wants you to believe by getting his system to place a loss exit level only to re-enter right away.

 

Thats why I asked to get him to post his backtest, which he will never do, because that will reveal this whole 1:2 Risk/Reward delusion !!

[PyeR2]

What I find even more irritating here is you not wanting to understand that this system does not use a stoploss.

 

Abdul detailed statements for all 5 EA's for the last 3 months are available, I strongly suggest that you take a look at them before you shoot from the hip again. The EA's most definitely do use a SL and there is no evidence in the trading statements to support your claim. Show me where the EA's repeatedly re-enter a position immediately after being stopped out? It doesn't happen - you are mistaken my friend.

I have even saved you the trouble of producing your own statements and uploaded them for your convenience, so please take a look and support your claims with evidence.

 

Detailed Statements: http://www.mediafire.com/?l70gi3tmc3yin

 

Let's see if you can walk the talk.

[Abdulisback]

PyeR2, the three months proof claim you provided is not enough to judge any system, but lets just not waist time arguing about that.

You never stepped forward and asked the Vendor to upload his backtest results.

 

As I indicated in my previous post, the backtests WILL prove my observations.

 

I never said it immediately buys, I said "Almost Immediately", and this is the third time I ask to get his backtests posted. you wasted your time collecting these 3 months of results, so why not waste a little more time to post 11 YEARS of results! Which is far more useful!

 

Please don't tell me you don't want to bother asking Winsor to do that,..... which clearly would indicate that you are taking his side, especially when you tipped off your last post with "Let's see if you can walk the talk" !!

 

I challenge you and everyone who disagrees with me on my observation on this EA to post 11 years of backtest results.

 

Please don't comeback with a reply without that 11 years backtest results, otherwise replying and debating with you would be so silly as Winsor him self.

[PyeR2]

Abdul if 3 months worth of forward testing is insufficient to draw a firm conclusion (which i agree with) then what about your 2 week test which you are hanging your hat on?

The only one being silly here is you because you have made very big claims (to the point of being aggressive) about the methodology of all 5 EA's when in fact you traded 1 EA for 2 weeks. In addition to this your claims are not substantiated by the trading statements as far as I can see and you are either unable or unwilling to point out where in the statements it does occur even after I spoon fed you the information. I did not get the statements from the vendor, I used the investor login to generate them myself.

Why should I ask the vendor for an 11yr back-test when you can do this yourself if you want it. Who says he even has an 11yr back-test to give? I don't think it necessarily proves anything anyway as markets were much less volatile 11 years ago so most EA's would require very different settings. How many EA's are you aware of that can survive a continuous (not broken up into 12mnth blocks) 11yr back-test.

I am not defending or supporting the EA or the vendor. The only point I am making is that your declarations about the methodology are grossly incorrect and I have given you 3 months worth of trading statements to prove it. Given that your observations were made over a 2 week period, a 3 month statement should be more than sufficient data for you to either pony up or shut up.

[Abdulisback]

 

Why should I ask the vendor for an 11yr back-test when you can do this yourself if you want it..

 

He never delivers his actual code, so you can't backtest what so ever. He does not even deliver a reciever EA.

 

I know of many other EAs which survive a continual 11 years backtest, but most are not for sale.

 

I got over 7 years of LIVE MANUAL forex trading experience and can judge a system by watching it trade for as little as 3 days, so 2 week is more than enough for me to figure out how things work.

 

You don't want to spend any time investigating this, and I don't want to waste time getting you to understand how this system works if you don't get those 11 years backtest posted.

 

For a 600K EA, don't you think its fair enough to ask for 11 years backtest?

 

 

 

Being crooked enough to build up an EA with-out a stoploss and claim that it actually uses a stoploss makes the vendor not worth investigating or debating about.

 

 

 

This is my last reply in this thread

[chimera123]

just my 2 cents....I think any further discussion is useless as the code of those systems are not available.....

 

Is there anybody who want to rely on a so called "signal service" ???? They can make with you whatever they want....... the code is needed !!

[PyeR2]

Abdul I have over 10yrs live trading experience but that is not the point. You claim the EA in effect does not use a stop loss because it re-enters a position immediately after being stopped out.

 

I have shown you that this is not the case by providing you with 5x 3 month detailed statements and still you sing the same song but refuse back your claims with anything other than hot air.

 

The 600k price tag is a marketing ploy in order to sell monthly subscriptions. I know you are bright enough to know this and by bringing it up really shows that you are clutching at straws and trying to divert attention off your claims that the EA's do not use a SL which is rubbish.

 

If your experience was that during a 2 week trial of 1 of the EA's you incurred a bad loss, then say that. Don't make up a story about the EA effectively not using a SL because it immediately re-enters a position that has been stopped out. This is clearly not the case according to the trading statements.

[Abdulisback]

PyeR2, Yes the UsdChf EA does not use a stoploss. and the reason why I made my judgement over all five EAs is because I got the vendor to post 3 of his systems results for over one year each off from his MIG account. the GbpUsd system has the longest records.

 

I did my homework on this, its only 15$ for his trial, and his contact info is at the tips of your fingers so you go do your own homework.

[PyeR2]

You are like a broken record. The systems do use SL's. You have the trading statements so point out to the forum precisely where "The Abdul Syndrome" occurs. I have looked closely at the statements - yes there are runs of 3 - 5 losses in a row sometimes but I checked the prices and times from 1 trade to the next and what you claim is not true. Having strings of losses is not unusual particularly for a positive risk reward system, you just need to be leveraged accordingly.

Anyway I give up. You are obviously one of those people that will argue black is white. I have done my homework and shown it to you - the trading statements don't lie. You have had every opportunity to post screenshots of a statements pointing out where "The Abdul Syndrome" occurs but you wont because you cant - so I rest my case.

[Abdulisback]

thats because the three months period of test you're providing was not run through a bad trading period... thats all.

 

I already asked you to post the backtest to prove this and you keep repeating the same crap about this lousy three months being an evidence about me being wrong on this. I can't really waste any more time with you

[PyeR2]

thats because the three months period of test you're providing was not run through a bad trading period... thats all.

 

I already asked you to post the backtest to prove this and you keep repeating the same crap about this lousy three months being an evidence about me being wrong on this. I can't really waste any more time with you

 

So your 2 weeks trial was sufficient time but 3 months is not. Why are you asking me for an 11yr back-test when it's not my EA and if you know it doesn't exist anyway? The reality is it either trades with a SL or it does not. The fact is that it does use a SL and there is no "Adbdul Syndrome".

[Abdulisback]

maybe you better ask him to give you the log-in for all his MIG accounts, just tell him you want to invest 100K, but you want to first see all

his trade history records. He won't hesitate and will assume you'll never figure out his tricks.

 

That would be a good start rather than depending on others to post their views, and calling mine "Abdul Syndrome", or rather than analyse his EA based on an excellent three months trading period

 

My two weeks were enough because it coincided with a bad period for this EA and saw exactly how the EA tries to over-come a trend change.

[PyeR2]

Abdul I have had enough of this pointless discussion. All the EA's use a SL. Take a look at a daily chart - there have been two major trend reversals on all the USD pairs over that time. Would you have preferred if I had referred to it as the Claytons Stop Loss Syndrome.

[iwjw]

peace guys