Entropy Voltex by renkokings

[normanmxw]

Looks good on backtest results. Comments anyone?

https://renkokings.com/entropy-voltex

[JackSparrow440]

2 hours ago, normanmxw said:

Looks good on backtest results. Comments anyone?

https://renkokings.com/entropy-voltex

Do you have it.?

[normanmxw]

not yet.

[Ninja_On_The_Roof]

As I have said in the past, plenty of times.

The "phenomenon" of NinzaCo stuff.

Once you see 1 of their stuff, your first impression is always...You really want it. You really wanna buy it.

The fact that we already have more than 20 plus of their indicators posted. Yet, how many of them you actually keep and use for your daily trading?

They always look good the second you see it. Especially the video clips of their indicators. Winners after winners. So effortlessly. So easy. So stress free.

But, in reality of actual trading, really?🤗

Edited Tuesday at 09:02 PM by Ninja_On_The_Roof

[⭐ solarin]

I 100% agree. NinzaCo's marketing (and many others like it) is all about visual impact and instant gratification. A video can never, and I mean never, be the basis for judging a trading system. Videos are, by definition, 'cherry-picked', meaning they only show the specific market segments where the indicator worked perfectly!

To consider a trading system truly reliable and profitable, you need much more than a few catchy clips. Here is what actually matters:

Rigorous Statistical Backtesting: 10 trades are not enough. You need a sample size of hundreds, if not thousands, of trades across different market cycles (trends, sideways markets, high and low volatility).
Max Drawdown Analysis: The real question isn’t 'how much does it make when it wins,' but rather 'how much do you lose and how long do you stay in the red' when the system inevitably goes through a losing streak.
Profit Factor and Risk/Reward: A system that wins 90% of the time but has a terrible risk/reward ratio (where one single loss wipes out ten wins) is destined to fail.
Forward Testing (Live or Demo): You have to see how the system reacts in real-time, accounting for spread, slippage, and actual volatility.
Robustness and Overfitting: Many of these indicators are over-optimized for past data. They worked great yesterday, but they will stop working tomorrow because they cannot adapt to changing market conditions.

[Ninja_On_The_Roof]

8 hours ago, solarin said:

I 100% agree. NinzaCo's marketing (and many others like it) is all about visual impact and instant gratification. A video can never, and I mean never, be the basis for judging a trading system. Videos are, by definition, 'cherry-picked', meaning they only show the specific market segments where the indicator worked perfectly!

To consider a trading system truly reliable and profitable, you need much more than a few catchy clips. Here is what actually matters:

Rigorous Statistical Backtesting: 10 trades are not enough. You need a sample size of hundreds, if not thousands, of trades across different market cycles (trends, sideways markets, high and low volatility).
Max Drawdown Analysis: The real question isn’t 'how much does it make when it wins,' but rather 'how much do you lose and how long do you stay in the red' when the system inevitably goes through a losing streak.
Profit Factor and Risk/Reward: A system that wins 90% of the time but has a terrible risk/reward ratio (where one single loss wipes out ten wins) is destined to fail.
Forward Testing (Live or Demo): You have to see how the system reacts in real-time, accounting for spread, slippage, and actual volatility.
Robustness and Overfitting: Many of these indicators are over-optimized for past data. They worked great yesterday, but they will stop working tomorrow because they cannot adapt to changing market conditions.

Love it when you mentioned the RR ratio. One could win 90% of the time but with terrible risk management and losses that can wipe out that 90%, is definitely a disaster.

Thank you.

Edited Wednesday at 05:48 AM by Ninja_On_The_Roof

[misalto]

yes when you see playback testing to sell you something is worthless ;                                                                    

even recorded data replayed through NT8 playback is not accurate . The reasons:

What NT8 stores in recorded data:

• The tick prices and volumes ✓
• The timestamps ✓
• The sequence order ✓

What NT8 cannot replay accurately:

• Millisecond concurrency — in live, 50 fills can arrive at the exact same millisecond from the matching engine. In playback NT8 serializes them one by one with artificial gaps between them. Your _lastTickTime aggregation bucketing will bucket differently.
• Bid/Ask arrival order — in live, Ask updates and Last trades arrive in a specific interleaved order that determines buy/sell classification. Playback reconstruction of this order is approximate.
• Network jitter — live data has real latency variation between prints. Playback smooths this out, making DeltaMs between prints artificially uniform.
• _tickTime second boundary — in live a burst of 20 prints can all arrive within 200ms of a second boundary. In playback the spacing is different so newTimeStamp fires at slightly different points.

[Ninja_On_The_Roof]

On 4/29/2026 at 9:05 PM, misalto said:

yes when you see playback testing to sell you something is worthless ;                                                                    

even recorded data replayed through NT8 playback is not accurate . The reasons:

What NT8 stores in recorded data:

• The tick prices and volumes ✓
• The timestamps ✓
• The sequence order ✓

What NT8 cannot replay accurately:

• Millisecond concurrency — in live, 50 fills can arrive at the exact same millisecond from the matching engine. In playback NT8 serializes them one by one with artificial gaps between them. Your _lastTickTime aggregation bucketing will bucket differently.
• Bid/Ask arrival order — in live, Ask updates and Last trades arrive in a specific interleaved order that determines buy/sell classification. Playback reconstruction of this order is approximate.
• Network jitter — live data has real latency variation between prints. Playback smooths this out, making DeltaMs between prints artificially uniform.
• _tickTime second boundary — in live a burst of 20 prints can all arrive within 200ms of a second boundary. In playback the spacing is different so newTimeStamp fires at slightly different points.

Yuppie! 100%. Not to mention, testing and using renko or even HA candles, won't be acurate!