Yes, really great present, thanks Popov.

EA Studio calculates the Balance Line Stability in three steps.

1. It calculates a virtual straight line between the initial and the final balance. It represents the "ideal" stability.
2. It finds the correlation between the Balance curve and the virtual line. It is a number between 0 and 1, where 1 means a perfect overlap.
3. It scales the "representative" part of the correlation in order to make it easier for the human understanding. The scaling formula is:

   stability = 3 * (100 * correlation - 66.66)

After that the value is rounded and limited from 0 to 100 (for any case and for preventing questions )

Hope it helps!

Hi Popov,

do you have a plan to add "Balance Line Stability" to the optimizer?

Best regards.

Yay!

Thanks Popov!

Hi Popov,

I just did a few tests with the new metric, and somehow it seems it is too "rounded" or limited (gives to similar values for strategies that have clearly have a pretty different equity curve). Look at the 3 equity lines in these 3 screenshots. For all of them, EA Studio gives a stability value of 99, but the equity curves are pretty different actually as you can see, they can´t all be 99 as 2 of them are clearly far away from a straight line. I´ve added the ideal straight line in RED to make it more clear what I mean. For the first strategy, I completely agree that it almost is a straight line, so the "99" EA Studio shows make sense. However, both other strategies are FAR away from following the straight red line, yet EA Studio also shows them as having "99", which doesn´t make much sense. I´ve re-created all 3 strategies in SQ 3 and SQX and looked at the stability values I am getting there. Strategy 1, of course, has a 0.98 for "Stability", but the other 2 strategies are in the 0.8 area only there, and that is correct, because, as we can see, they do not follow a straight line at all like strategy #1 does.

Can you please turn off the "rounding" (or whatever it is that causes this) or adjust the formula so that strategies like in screenshot 2 and 3 won´t get "99" as well but are in the ~80 area? The metric doesn´t have much use if all 3 strategies get a "99" like if all 3 of them would follow a straight equity line, which clearly is not the case for strategy #2 and #3. Thanks so much :-)

Yes, I also noticed that problem and already uploaded a solution.

It calculates the stability from the first deal to the last deal. The formula ignores the flat periods before the first deal and after the last deal.

Please recalculate your collections.

Great, thanks, but which problem you mean? My first post or my second post with the OOS?

Great, I will test this, thank you very much :-)

P.S.: Here is an even more drastic example that something is wrong in the calculation (or the calculation is right, but the way it´s implemented is flawed). How can this strategy have an stability of 96.47? 96.47 should mean that we have an almost perfect straight line, but this equity line is far from following the straight red line:

And this equity curve is even worse, yet has an even higher stability value:

Something must be clearly wrong with the calculation.

P.S.2: On a side note: could you possibly add the "Balance Line Stability" (once it works correctly) as an Optimization target? That would be great. Thanks :-)

Hello guys,

Thank you for the reports!

I'm aware of these problems and think for a solution. It looks like that the current formula is too sensitive to the number of bars and to the initial account amount. I have to adjust it to compensate these factors.

Have great holidays!!

Popov,

what about using R-squared and Slope the same way as in MT4Tracker..?