Footon, thanks very much for you help here. I was expecting something different in regard to tick data, I already know the process you have linked to. I guess I was more wondering what file name you need to use to make FSB use tick data. This would be settings in the instrument editor i would expect, for example AUDUSD1 is the aussie USD on 1 min and AUDUSD5 is the aussie USD on 5 min so what would be aussie USD tick? but thanks again for helping I do appreciate it.
Regarding the interbar scanner, I don't have an issue with how long it takes, and I understand how it works. To be honest this is a brilliant improvement for backtesting, very very well done to the people who drept that idea up.
You may be right. MT4 compared to FSB is probably a waste of time, however in the absence of that perhaps you might know how the backtester in FSB was tested in the first place, if I understand how it was baselined then this maybe all I need.
you see I can't believe that when the backtester was first developed that there was not some kind of method used to determine if it was actually working, if I was developing it I would be using some method to determine that the calculations it is using are written correctly. I would not be so confident as to just expect that something I had created would work without issue, but then again I am not a developer by profession, I am en implementation engineer so I have to fix stuff others have written all the time so that might explain my thinking.
The very fact that two different versions of the same product (FSB and FSB Pro) give vastly different results using the exact same data and the same strategy (and FSB Pro seems more accurate than FSB which is a surprise because its an Alpha build) seems to indicate that the backtester doesn't actually work at all.
Given that I don't know of any backtester on the planet that actually works properly, then there isn't really anything to baseline against. So it is probably best to go with what is the industry practice that being Mt4 with 99% model quality using a very basic EA (SMA Cross) with identical settings in both MT4 and FSB using the same data.
I would expect that as SMAs can only be calculated one way (as far as I know a simple moving average on the close is still and average over a period, kinda hard to stuff that up) then I would expect the results good or bad to be almost the same. If they are not then this shows at some level that the backtester is inaccurate and then you have to look to testing your strategies an other way.
testing on real data is of cause the best way forward, but honestly that will take a hell of a lot of time if you are trying to validate something the generator built, for example the generator generates a strategy which tested with 18K profit over 3 months, it will take at least 2 months to confirm if the backtest was accurate or not. if you have 10 or so such strategies this is 2 to 3 years. I could have been in the market with something if I was pretty confident the backtest was accurate.
Understand please, I dont expect the backtester to be a perfect predictor of future profit. This is plainly never going to happen (its like trying to predict the next number on a roulette wheel, probability is it will be completely random regardless of how many times the ball has landed on 12) but it needs to be close, maybe 60 - 70% accurate in predicting profits.
at present the FSB backtester might as well be a random number generator because it appears to be about as accurate (this is regardless of how long it takes to produce the results). I hopw you can see my point of view.