After testing some EA's on FSB and I run them in MT4 or MT5 the results form FSB is quite different.

For example in FSB an EA produces a total gain of $19000, , the same EA run on MT5  produces a profit of $419.

I realized so many variables are not been implemented in MT5 .

Does any body knows?

As part of the quality control all EA must be place to the Back-test of MT4/5 . But been the difference so radical I am wondering why, and the steep to correct the situation from happening or at least to lower the negative impact .

I'm glad I don't have to face such restrictions, however if I were to be in your situation, I wonder whether it would be helpful to set up 2 accounts.  One account for Long Only and another account for Short Only. 

For example, instead of using a $10k account, I break it up into 2x $5k accounts (one Long only and another Short only, when you load the EA in MT4, you can select this function)

But accounts uses the same set of EA portfolio (eg 10 EA) and so the 2 combined accounts will be your "actual portfolio".  And these accounts will give a more overall balance portfolio.  And in each account, I'll diversify with different markets to spread the risk.

That's just my thoughts on how to overcome such restrictions.

Regards
Hannah

I am wondering if you have had difficulty with your broker or government authorities which is causing you to continue with this situation.

People are running thousands of experts on their platforms with no difficulty, I am wondering why you keep bringing this up.

Can you explain or is this just something that you re puzzling with for your own interest.

In a FIFO environment , if the first EA is long , the second signal SHORT from a subsequent EA is ignored by the account .

These problem is not encountered in a NON-FIFO accounts for the creation of the portfolio , unless there is a feature
that will take this variable into account.

Basically one solution for the FIFO accounts is a reduction on the opposite order, not a plain order,.
That way maintaining the balance.

For example if in the FIFO account you are long 10 contracts and one of the EA's send an order :  1ct. Short  , instead of a ( for sure rejected order) should be treated as a reduction of the  whole long ... so the order should be:  "close  1 ct. of the outstanding position , in this case close 1 out of 10 ct. for a balance of 9 . That instead instead of entering a 1ct. Short  order that will be ignored or rejected by the platform.

I do not know if I am clear enough but resolving these issue will make a portfolio feature worth wile for any FIFO account,

Other that that I think the tool is great.

SQ is very good at following us.

Wish them to invent something one day, just to be able to speak for it

I hear you P :-)

It is a sign of flattery at least.

It demonstrates the power of what you are achieving.

Wish them to invent something one day, just to be able to speak for it

Yes, your observations are correct.

EA Studio is the world's first and still the only software that supports Portfolio Experts.

Just a heads up P.

SQX are hot on your tail. I have just been backtesting a portfolio expert generated from their platform.

Nothing like a bit of market intelligence to keep us all lean :-)

EA Studio is the world's first and still the only software that supports Portfolio Experts.

The creation of EA portfolio as single EA is only possible with Expert Advisor Studio?

Please advise.