<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title type="html"><![CDATA[Forex Software — Do we have a list of best practices and/or other protocol standards?]]></title>
	<link rel="self" href="https://forexsb.com/forum/feed/atom/topic/7806/" />
	<updated>2019-04-22T20:34:58Z</updated>
	<generator>PunBB</generator>
	<id>https://forexsb.com/forum/topic/7806/do-we-have-a-list-of-best-practices-andor-other-protocol-standards/</id>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Re: Do we have a list of best practices and/or other protocol standards?]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forexsb.com/forum/post/55256/#p55256" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<div class="quotebox"><cite>automachination wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>6) ...can we have multiple instances of EA Studio running across multiple browser tabs?</p></blockquote></div><p>Yes, but.&nbsp; You can run as many instances of EA Studio as your machine will tolerate (# of CPU cores/threads and sufficient RAM), but each instance must have its own window, not running in a tab, and not minimized, as those will stop the calculations.&nbsp; </p><p>I think most&nbsp; people use multiple virtual desktops (VD) to more easily manage multiple browser instances without minimizing them or burying them.&nbsp; Windows 10 includes VD (CTL+WindowsKey+D to add each VD); Windows 7 requires a third-party add-in.</p><p>Sorry,that&#039;s all I can help with.&nbsp; New-ish user here, also.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[Dunn]]></name>
				<uri>https://forexsb.com/forum/user/11151/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2019-04-22T20:34:58Z</updated>
			<id>https://forexsb.com/forum/post/55256/#p55256</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Do we have a list of best practices and/or other protocol standards?]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="https://forexsb.com/forum/post/55255/#p55255" />
			<content type="html"><![CDATA[<p>The deeper that I go into EA Studio, the more impressed I get. Although I&#039;m familiar with some of these tools from past data experience, the fact that they&#039;re all packaged together in seamless fashion cuts out much of the grunt work and Excel spreadsheets.</p><p>That said, it also opens up a new world that hand-coded data can&#039;t easily move through. For example, I can re-optimize and re-randomize as much as I want, diminishing (or negative) returns can drift in at any time, and the real work becomes keeping track of seemingly random variables. I can dilute OOS or not, I can randomize X via Monte Carlo or keep it intact while randomizing something else, etc., which means there&#039;s an infinite variety of ways to make money with EA Studio, with or without following best practices.</p><p>But it&#039;s been years since the software has been released- do we have a list of best practices yet that aren&#039;t so controversial?</p><p>For example, these settings make sense to me in the Reactor:</p><p>1) Monte Carlo- randomize most settings, especially random bar start, but are the defaults too restrictive? For example, I can imagine 5-10% randomization working for many settings since you will not likely get too-steep deviations (depending on overall TF) with 30+ years of data (which I recognize is itself controversial).</p><p>2) OOS- there are arguments for any % setting offered, with the trade-off being fewer validated results at 50% (although the safest choice). I am thinking of sticking to 30-40% to be as conservative, but, again, I&#039;m new to the software, and don&#039;t know if results are typically better with more aggression here given the huge # of diversified strategies we can run to further ameliorate risk elsewhere.</p><p>3) Is over-diversification a concern? Some only trade one pair with lots of strategies, others do a dozen or more. My first batch of tests will be on EURUSD + USDJPY since this not only captures 3 highly liquid markets, but also sets USD against itself, in a sense. Not that these two pairings are a hedge, but they will likely capture good upside for both over the next few years and allow you to limit downside.</p><p>4) Not sure how EA Studio&#039;s multi-market validation works. Different pairs do exhibit some different behaviors, but this is sometimes overstated. As a robustness tool, is MMV simply a way to test for generic strategies- meaning, for getting strategies that have a verifiable yet more generic edge across all markets (meaning, the chances of diluting get less and less)? For example, simply buying every daily pivot in a modified Martingale style will work for all pairs if you&#039;re comfortable with quick 1-2R wins. I can&#039;t imagine such an edge going dull since the concept of expensive/cheap will continue to exist along pivot lines.</p><p>5) Anything you&#039;ve learned about these EA Portfolios more broadly?</p><p>6) Finally, on an unrelated note- can we have multiple instances of EA Studio running across multiple browser tabs? What&#039;s the best way to simultaneously test multiple time frames on multiple pairs, adding them to the total portfolio as I go along? I typically do 6-8 hours for strategies for each time frame on a pair.</p><p>Thank you.</p>]]></content>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[automachination]]></name>
				<uri>https://forexsb.com/forum/user/11188/</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2019-04-22T19:14:08Z</updated>
			<id>https://forexsb.com/forum/post/55255/#p55255</id>
		</entry>
</feed>
