<![CDATA[Forex Software — Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/topic/9073/stagnation-in-days-calc/ Tue, 22 Mar 2022 23:01:32 +0000 PunBB <![CDATA[Re: Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68406/#p68406 Thanks for the find ViniQ, I was wrong! And thanks Popov for fixing it, that´s great.

]]> Tue, 22 Mar 2022 23:01:32 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68406/#p68406 <![CDATA[Re: Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68395/#p68395 I can confirm the fix, now EAS report the same output for statistic stagnation in days than expected. This software is the best, Thank you!

]]> Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:42:07 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68395/#p68395 <![CDATA[Re: Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68394/#p68394 Hello Vini,

The bug is fixed.

It was because I calculated the dates as a count of bars corrected with the period length, however, I forgot that there are no bars on the weekends sad
Now EA Studio calculates the count of days by subtracting the exact time of the Close deals.

Thank you for the report!

]]> Mon, 21 Mar 2022 18:21:03 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68394/#p68394 <![CDATA[Re: Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68259/#p68259 Hi geek! I do understand your point until inspected Journal.
Export the trades at "EA Studio > Strategy > Report > Journal > Export" to get the file "EA Studio Journal.csv", open it with spreadsheet software then make a new column to track the stagnation period. You'll find discrepancy between the date calculations.

https://i.imgur.com/hsLRTuL.png

Google Sheets - EA Studio Journal.csv



https://i.imgur.com/PT80Pct.png

]]> Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:36:18 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68259/#p68259 <![CDATA[Re: Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68248/#p68248 Just one slightly different trade outcome can lead to a completely different stagnation period, that´s pretty normal. Just imagine that one trade had just $1 less profit in the MT5 backtest compared to the EA Studio backtest and hence no new equity high was made in MT5 for another 200 days, while EA Studio made one after 70 days, hence the difference. It´s pretty normal that such slight differences can lead to such "massive" differences in the metrics, simply because of the difference of just $1 on just 1 trade. It doesn´t mean that EA Studio or MT5 is wrong.

]]> Wed, 09 Mar 2022 23:34:39 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68248/#p68248 <![CDATA[Re: Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68243/#p68243 You're right footon about the win/loss ratio! Thank you for the insight.

]]> Wed, 09 Mar 2022 18:08:37 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68243/#p68243 <![CDATA[Re: Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68242/#p68242 Win/loss is correct, it is a question of format. The formula is wins/(wins+losses), therefore the ratio's value is from >0 to <=1, which makes its usage more practical in the software.

]]> Wed, 09 Mar 2022 17:37:37 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68242/#p68242 <![CDATA[Stagnation in days calc]]> https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68240/#p68240 Hello Miroslav and forex software team! I've found a problem comparing EAS Report vs EAS Journal for the metric stagnation in days. For the presented strategy the EAS report output 70 stagnation in days and from its own Journal .csv file it's different value. In EA Studio Journal the drawdown period starts at trade id 359 "2017-11-28" and ends at trade id 725 "2018-08-23", that's 270 days. I'll attach to this post my "EA Studio Journal.csv".

]]> Wed, 09 Mar 2022 15:39:05 +0000 https://forexsb.com/forum/post/68240/#p68240