Thanks .

1)    Trailing Stop loss  on MT5.( By the way i could not find MT5 posts )
Is MT5 has  a problem ?
I made many ex5 , and I run them on MT5s tester  ,  it opens trades , but the trailing stop loss never works.
Though  it works on MT4s tester .
( I am thinking , that maybe MT5 ‘s Data , affected when I am making changes on them.
I am erasing Zeros from the last column and I am changing the CSV’s  name  , in order to FSB can read them. )

2)    Also I see many deferent results , when I create a strategy on FSB and test them on testers MT4 – MT5..

Please note , that in all cases , I have imported  the  right Data into the right  FSB Source Data Folder.

Anyone can answer, thanks in advance.

I'll try for last time.

The experts use indicators.
The indicators need historical data in order to calculate signals.
If you have MA with period of 15, it needs minimum 15 bars to calculate its first value.
The strategy needs 2 bars more to calculate the signals.
If you don't have enough bars, the strategy cannot calculate the first signals.

If you have indicators that need 104 bars, you have to force MetaTrader to load these 104 bars. That is!

The inability of MT or third party plugins to load enough bars is not our problem.

Do understand!
You made me clear that this is not a FSB problem.
So I will solve this problem outside this forum.
Sorry to bother you.

The experts use indicators.
The indicators need historical data in order to calculate signals.
If you have MA with period of 15, it needs minimum 15 bars to calculate its first value.
The strategy needs 2 bars more to calculate the signals.
If you don't have enough bars, the strategy cannot calculate the first signals.

If you have indicators that need 104 bars, you have to force MetaTrader to load these 104 bars. That is!

The inability of MT or third party plugins to load enough bars is not our problem.

You have to select the "Use date" option in the MT tester and to set a starting data in a way that will assure enough bars on the chart.

The correct "from" date depends on the time frame, the number of bars on the chart and the number of the recurred bars of the expert.

You can be sure that is done correctly

See attached picture for Dat Horizon settings.
Can this be the problem with the bar loading in MT4?

The correct "from" date depends on the time frame, the number of bars on the chart and the number of the recurred bars of the expert.

Now our experts try to detect how many bars they need in order to show a stable signals. It looks like it is meaningless to check for more than 1000 bars.

I'm solving these problems for my by using only Simple Moving Averages and periods lower than 100. This is possible in FSB Pro because we can set the MA type for all indicators. For example, we can set MACD to use Simple MAs. On the other hand, the MetaTrader's MACD (and EA Studio) use Exponential MAs.

Here is an expert that prints the number of bars.
Run it on your MT Tester and see the "Journal" tab for the number.

This show that if no start date is selected the MT Tester loads 101 bars.

By setting a start date, the tester can start with a greater number.

Here is the expert code:

int OnInit()
  {
    MqlRates rates[];
    int bars = CopyRates(_Symbol, 0, 0, 100000, rates);
    Print("Bars: " + IntegerToString(bars));
    return INIT_FAILED;
  }

have run it with TDS on
As you can see I have 101 bars loaded see attachment
Run it without TDS on and I have 1002 bars loaded

What the tick data is great for is backtesting, optimiszing, but with FSBPro you do not really need it....

I can understand that you are experiencing some difficulties, keep in mind that FSBPro is using the bar close and open in most cases, where as the tick data is intrabar..

Why testing?
Strategies with good results in FSB (incl Monte Carlo) had a margin call after 2 days of trading live.
That's why I want to have second opinion.
And I run 10 year 99% tick data back test on every EA I buy or make.
It's no guarantee for a good EA but it shows me that it would have run good on 10 years info.
Which means that it's not a bad EA.

What does that other 1% stand for in tick data back test? What does 99% mean? Data is one thing, but the real question is how is that data handled.

Have you compared live results with back test results after the fact? Take data you traded on and back test your strats with that, compare trades, do they match. This way you get the idea whether there's an issue or not.