Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 28 total)
  • Author
  • #7650

    Hey Andi,

    Glad to hear from you again.

    Yes, it is not bad to reduce the data. In EA Studio the maximum is 200 000 and that is for a reason.

    In FSB Pro I go maximum to 300 000 on M1 chart.

    Yes, I know FSB Pro is fantastic strategy builder…keep in mind that I tested it long long time before placing it on our website.

    Admin bar avatarAndi

    Thank you indeed, I missed to see your answer Petko.

    So should I reduce my Historical data? I guess this way I will put more weight on the recent market data.

    And by the way FSB is the best tool I have ever used in trading.



    keep in mind that you can collect long time Historical data from one server from one broker, and at one moment if they move your account to another server, or if you open another live account it could be on another server.

    Normally the broker should notify you about that, but I wouldn’t trust it.

    Anyway, Thetrader is right, the more bars you have, the better, but your profit per day will reduce. Simply, the FSB Pro looks for such strategies that are working profitably over the whole period, which cause smaller daily profits.

    Kind regards,


    Hey Andi, I think your data is a bit too much. With so many bars you will get Moreno robust strategies but their daily results will be not that satisfying. The more data you have, the more you limit the average profit per day.

    The only think you can test is if your demo account matches with the journal.

    Admin bar avatarAndi

    Hello guys!

    Interesting topic about the FSB here. I actually succeeded to download some historical data from my broker, they have it on their website. And on M1 I have more than 650k bars. I am not sure if so many bars would be good idea?3

    Also, how can I be sure that this Historical data is from the server I am using for the broker?


    Thank you, Edu! Appreciate it. It is always about testing…

    Let me know if you have other questions about FSB.


    happy birthday, i have buyed your course. Now i have to test again 😉


    Sure, Edu. Let me know if you have any other questions.

    Kind regards,


    thank you again

    i saw your new 100 Ea probably i am going to buy it with the new discount for you birthday 🙂


    Hey Edu,

    for the first post:

    The Optimization results seems better, and I think the Monte Carlo looks just normal for the number of bars you have. Later when you have bigger number of bars, the strategies will get more and more robust.

    The USDJPY looks so much better. I see on your FSB back test that you have more than 300 count of trades which is a reliable number.

    Also, when you perform the Monte Carlo, you can select the last two options together. No need to do it separately.



    (Please see the previous message before.)

    New Update, after EURUSD-EURGBP-GBPUSD, i was able to collect more data for USDJPY

    This is the before:


    This is the after:




    This IS Monte carlo:



    If you can give me your opinion also about this and the other in the previous post would be highly appreciate



    Me too as entrepreneur, i have no fixed day off.

    I understand the problem and i did it again here the results:
    nuovogbpyjpy_secondo_indiczioni<br />what is the boiling point for aluminum<br />

    it seems that it has huge drawdown (when i use an Ea in real i typicaly use 0,10 lots)

    I also did the montecarlo test (that i finally understand how it works)

    mont_229<br />what is the boiling point for aluminum<br />

    montecarlo_229_pt_2<br />what is the boiling point for aluminum<br />

    How it looks to you? My broker and this strategy work well together?


    Now i have 3 good “looking” EA (EURUSD-EURGBP-GBPUSD), 1 (USDJPY) With too little data (but in demo in 5 days it closed everyday in loss) and this.

    Probably i will buy the 99 ea course even if testing all of them would be difficoult considerinf FX blue doesn’t track very well the magic numbers

    Thank you again


    Hello Edu,

    you are missing something with the optimization.
    The first time you did it with step of 1, and the second time with step of 10.

    It is good to do optimization with round numbers as step. But make sure the parameters of the strategy before the optimization to be round as well.

    For example, make Stop Loss 80 and Take Profit 70, and then do optimization with step of 10. Same for the other parameters

    Your Monte Carlo is just fine. The over-optimized strategies will show total loss with all tests, which is not your case. And yes, you are correct.

    No weekend for me during the last years, mate 🙂



    Wow thank you i wasn’t aspecting a reply on saturday.

    So i tried as you said, here i removed the “acceptance criteria” and the equity changed


    after i try to put bigger criteria, but anything changed


    So i try the montecarlo test. First parameter


    then the second (doesn’t look good)


    What do you think? Should i remove this from the demo and try another ea?

    Before i didn’t explain well, i was asking:

    If Monete carlo test:

    – Give me an equity similiar to my ea’s equity ——-> Good Strategy and not overoptimize
    – Give me a different equity ——-> overoptimize strategy

    is this correct?

    Thank you and again have a good weekend


    Hello Edu,

    this backtest looks bad. When you optimize in EA Studio, you have an acceptance criteria. Try to remove it, and do the optimization. This way you will see if the issue is there. If it passes, than try to make the acceptance criteria not so strict.

    The Monte Carlo itself is the robustness test for over optimization. If it fails, it means that the strategy is probably over-optimized.

    Another old method to see if a strategy is over optimized is to change manually some of the parameters in the indicators. If you see huge difference in the equity, this is also a sign that the strategy is over-optimized.

    Have a beautiful weekend too!
    Petko A

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 28 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.