mike, the cynic in me tends to agree with the cynic in you. The results "stuck" at 29 November, or such similar date, I seem to recall, and were updated to 6 Jan after a good run in December.

It has been a better week this week with 3 wins and 2 losses for me. The advice to place orders at 13:00 seems to have helped.

Just a quick note to say that I finally finished my little guide to trading with Cap Spreads on Android phones. I've posted it in the private trading room for those who may be interested.

Z

Originally Posted by Fatchance

mike, the cynic in me tends to agree with the cynic in you. The results "stuck" at 29 November, or such similar date, I seem to recall, and were updated to 6 Jan after a good run in December.

An interesting comment. Given that we know some months are traditionally bad for trading, how much leeway should vendors have in their reporting of results? Should it be monthly or can we give them a couple of months either way to average it out?

Z

Vendors are using the results on their websites to help sell their products (obviously) so it's pretty predictable they are going to update after good runs as the more recent results will catch the eye first, and "bury" the poor runs within a lengthening list. Hence I'd expect updates to follow this pattern, rather than monthly or whatever.

Or as we've seen with Forex Morning Trade, if the system stops delivering, the results might not get updated at all!

Our results for January were as follows:

· Time period / Time-frame = 1 month / 30 minute
· Time Traded = 13:00 UK Time
· Risk Per Trade = 2.00%
· Number Of Trades / Winners / Losers = 21 / +9 / -11
· Percentage Of Profitable Trades = 42.86%
· Average Winning / Losing Trade = +3.00% / -2.00%
· Profit Factor (Gross Profit / Gross Loss) = 1.13
· Largest Drawdown = -14.00%
· Average Per Month Return = +3.00%

Suppose we had to expect a "blip" after 3 very good months and the decision to promote this to our Systems We Use list.

A profit, all be it a small one to make it 4 consecutive months in a row and an average +12% a month for 5 minutes a day. The most worrying experience was the -14% drawdown (7 losers in a row). The 1:1.5 Risk:Reward we are using though meant that the 4 winning trades in a row after this almost made this much less painful.

If you do decide to purchase this system, please support us by using our link and by reporting back your findings, both are valuable to us and the service.

Hello,
In the Jan'12 synopsis you finish with a average of +12%/ month overall comment but on the bottom of the Jan'12 up-date it says average +3%. Is the +3% just for Jan'12?
I do not suppose any one has the results for the various set-ups?
I read a comment that the lowest risk setting has performed well of late (although to be honest if +12% is the mean average, well that is blooming good.)

I cannot trade until I start to work from home again (as my work has a firewall that blocks anything not work related) in March so I will keep monitoring these pages.

After everything, I think I will probably just go with the 3 ducks 1-1. Suits the way I work. It not just a working system that people need in my eyes but a system that fits the individuals psychology.

Thanks for your continuing hard work!

Hi - Yes - Sorry that's just the way we report - the +3% is just for January, apologies for the confusion.

I see the results have been "updated" on the Wall Street Time Shift website; I say "updated" because they jump from 6 Jan to 26 Jan (missing the days in between) and 3 Feb, when the "winning" trade was wrecked for many people by mega-slippage, is reported as +37. Oh dear.

Originally Posted by Fatchance

I see the results have been "updated" on the Wall Street Time Shift website; I say "updated" because they jump from 6 Jan to 26 Jan (missing the days in between) and 3 Feb, when the "winning" trade was wrecked for many people by mega-slippage, is reported as +37. Oh dear.

Nah, forget about the 6 Jan to 26 Jan period, there was just a loss of 80 pip...