Topic: FSB Pro Optimization Sequence
The Strategy Rule section determines the Strategy's Entry accuracy and Exit Accuracy. The Protection Section impact the Strategy's Exit Rule.
Which section has greater impact on the outcome of producing more Robust Strategy?
What make a strategy robust? Which section has a greater impact on a strategy's robustness? The strategy's rules (opening/closing) or the money protection/Protection Section (SL, TP and BE)? (though both are important, it's the strategy's rules that try to find a repeatable patterns whereas, the money protection is finding a statistical/optimal exit with no bearing on repeatable patterns).
Under the Optimization Tool
I noticed that when I want to optimize the Strategy, the Optimizer seem to start optimizing the Protection Section (Stop Loss, Take Profit and Breakeven) 1st and then move on to optimize the Strategy's rules. If this is observation is correct, could you kindly consider changing the optimization procedure. Optimize the Strategy's Rules 1st and then optimize the Protection Section last.
In another words, can you start with optimize the Strategy's rule 1st, starting with the Biggest Time frame 1st, if LTF is being used and followed by the indicator that has the largest parameter value. For eg if I have 2 H4 indicator rules, eg 1st rule - MA150 fast higher than slow MA200 for H4 and 2nd rule is MA100 fast higher than slow MA200 for H4, then optimize the bigger parameter 1st, i.e. MA150/200 then followed by the smaller parameter i.e. MA100/200 and if there are any lower time frame, use the same rule,
So we prioritize the optimization algorithm, Optimize 1) the Biggest Time frame 1st (eg. H4, H1, M30 in this sequence) , and if there are more than 1 rules that use the same time frame, then,
2) Optimize the indicator with the biggest Parameter value 1st and then move to the next 2nd highest parameter value
Once we have finished optimized the indicators rules, then move on to optimize the Protection Section (Stop Loss, Take Profit and Break Even).
The reason why we need to optimize the Indicator Rules 1st and not the Protection Section because it's the Strategy's rule that need to be refined 1st, i.e. find the best parameter setting that produce more robust reaction to the market fluctuation.
It's the rules that make the Strategy more robust, the SL, TP, BE do not constitute to better rules, it only improve the strategy's exit accuracy and not the strategy's entry rules. A good EA is 1st of all, good entry then followed by good exit.
A good entry is more important than a good exit (I'm not saying it's not important but lesser in comparison though both are still very important).
For those who just want to refine your exit rules only in the Protection Section, we can then un-check/tick all the indicators sections.
For those who only want to refine the entry/exit rules only, then likewise, un-check/tick the Protection Section.
The benefit of choosing which section you want to optimize 1st would have you focus which section (indicator/protection) you are aiming to improve 1st. However, this method isn't complete because we can't optimize both together in the manner of focusing improving the indicators first and then improve the protection section later. However, this method means we have to break up the optimizing time/procedure into 2 separate efforts instead of 1 seamless procedure.
Ideally, if we can have the option to choose which to optimize 1st, that would be perfect. And we get to optimize both sections in 1 procedure (but with the choice to choose which section to optimize 1st)