Date:Thu Nov 21 2024Tokyo:5:12Sydney:7:12New York:15:12London:20:12CET:21:12
BinaryOptions.net Forums› Signals/Robots/Autotraders etc
What about Quantum Binary Signals? Is it trusted signals provider?
icaka
Posts: 6 ✭
Posts: 6 ✭
If you have any experience with them just give your opinions. Thanks in advance!
Comments
Please note, in 45 days, they will not be on SignalPush anymore as they've decided to stop using it. So we can no longer attest to their performance after this period.
They never were. I would HIGHLY suggest, if you're going to use any independent signal service... do your due diligence. If you decide to sign up, CLOSELY monitor the signals sent and the performance before you decide to use those for your own account. Too many of them are just great marketers and the signals aren't great.
Not to promote our own service but we are truly transparent. If we have a bad signal provider, you'll see it. You can see their full performance history since they joined and can make your decisions about that. We're an independent marketplace. We do an initial validation of performance before we allow a provider onto our beta.. where they also have to prove themselves before being put onto our marketplace.
Point is... do your due diligence.
on your trading account. This is the reality from what I have seen because there is no real-time in trading so some accounts will miss trades
and or win or lose a few trades. In the best of worlds these missed or different outcomes can be managed and so honest results can help you
discern if a service is for you. We share our results and I trade our bets and for the most part I would say there is no more than a 2-5% difference on a sample of 100 trades but as with anyone published results are not perfect. You have to look at all the value a service brings you ( education,customer service etc... )
We have been using the SP API and sharing our signals to automated copy for some time now. I was very disappointed in the latest Michael Freeman actions and those in league with him. I personally believe there is a place for Automated trading in binary options but there are way way to many scams and posers and even if you take signals it is best viewed as a supplement to learning what good trade setups look like and all the variables that move the markets.. Binary is nothing like when I started but still a great way to start learning and get involved with the markets IMHO.
They use Martingale automatically in all of their signal results. This massively increases the so called "win-rate" whilst being negative EV for the trader.
It's like rolling a dice. The odds of losing twice in a row are 0.5x0.5 = 25%. That means you have a 75% win-rate rolling a dice twice in a row and receiving at least one win. This is how SignalFeed presents all its results.
Of course, just becasue you have a 75% win-rate doesn't mean it's +EV at all. Lets say you wager $1 per dice roll then lose. You then double up using the martingale strategy and wager $2 per roll. If you win, you make $1 net profit ($2-$1). If you lose, you make $3 loss. Thus, you need at least a 3:1 win ratio to break-even.
Therefore SignalPush isn't transparent at all. If they were transparent then they'd show the actual ROI for each signal provider as opposed to the win-rate post-martingale, which is pointless. Even a dice roll becomes a 75% win-rate when you double or nothing on losses..
- We don't "automatically" include martingales. It's only by default on the performance when the service uses martingales. If you don't like them, you can ignore the providers who use them or, see below for other options.
- Our current performance calculation is based on the industry accepted method for calculating a martingale. If you take a trade and it is a loss and you follow it up with a winning martingale, most consider it to be 100%. Before we implemented this calculation, we polled our users and the community and this is what they decided for us to use. You can see more information behind our calculation here: https://signalpush.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/200221655-How-is-martingale-performance-calculated-
- We allow you to display performance by regular calculations (non-martingale) as well
- The signals and their win/loss status is there, transparently, you can calculate the % however you like. Nothing is stopping you from calculating your own statistics in the method YOU find acceptable
- Not all providers use martingales, plenty who don't
- Clients have full control and can turn martingales off or can have them trade the same size as a normal trade
- We're working on implementing a new calculation model that shows ROI based on user input values (such as user input return and trade size) but due to the fact that we're in the US, we have to be careful with how we represent "ROI" and are currently investigating options with our legal team
PS - Not to mention your FIRST post here is to call us a scam and promote SignalFeeds? Fishy.
*why am I talking ghetto? I have to stop watching all these inner city guys and their videos! FeR ReaLz!*
You think it's "extremely hard" to even see regular results? Where it says "View performance as REGULAR | MARTINGALE" is extremely hard? Where there is a * on the leaderboard and it says "provider uses martingales", it's hard to tell they use martingales? If it was that hard, we'd hear about it, which we don't. Everyone understands because the users/community are the ones who established how things would be displayed and we take client feedback very seriously. We've already stated we are working on a flexible leaderboard where clients can customize the display to their own trade sizes and parameters to further assit
We've stated it before and we'll state it again. Anyone who subscribes to ANY signal service, should review the performance in depth and establish if the risk associated with the service is inline with their risk profile. For instance, some users like providers who use martingales, some don't. Some users like providers that take a lot of martingales, some don't. The point is, all of the information is there for a user to make their own informed decision.
The problem is the providers making stupid promises to lure newbies.
However, the clients are a part of the problem as well. They have unrealistic
plans. They think they can/should win 80% of the time with Signal providers.
So they create a demand... for being fooled, and what they get is a bunch of scammers with their
scam bots and auto-traders and other BS that just wipes their accounts.
I can definitely see myself sharing my trades via SignalPush.
Right now I can only promise a win rate above 62%.
That is without Martingale. But newbies don't want to hear that, they want
to win 80% of the time. So instead they go get ripped off.
A 5K account with only 3% invested per trade and with a 62% win rate would give you
10K, in my case in just 5 months. So 1K a month, but people are sooo greedy...
They want to open a 250$ account and make 20 000 in two months, LOL.
And sure, a few people here and there get lucky and do make huge sums before they
wipe their accounts.
Just look through this very forum and you'll see examples of what I'm talking about.
So the problem is not SignalPush, it's greedy newbies and signal providers that
want to use their greed to make a quick buck and get out.
Too me, it looks like SP is doing their best to get rid of such Signal providers.
Guess the future will tell. But so long as your expectations are unrealistic there will be
scammers around to prey on your greed.
I only do an average of 2 trades per day with exceptions and I risk less than 2.5%.
Yes, at least 95% fail sooner or later because they are greedy, they want to make money
without any effort what so ever. Before they understand what they have done wrong
they have blown several accounts and life savings. I guess you could say that their
development as traders is slow... In other words... slightly retarded.
Hit me up on skype at Brymcafee (McAllen TX)
www.tradingaxis.com
If they wanted to be legit then they should disallow martingale for anyone with a win-rate below 75%, since this is -EV.
I agree your service is a great concept and needed but by giving providers the opportunity to market themselves with Martingale results you're just providing unrealistic expectations.
Your example though is not true in most instances. The example below shows a martingale history with a 62.5% ITM (martingale and non) and would of turned a profit both ways.
Assuming $100 trade size ($200 martingale) with 80% payout.
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE WIN +$160
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE LOSS -$200
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE WIN +$160
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE LOSS -$200
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE WIN +$160
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE LOSS -$200
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE WIN +$160
REGULAR WIN +$80
REGULAR LOSS -$100
MARTINGALE LOSS -$200
Total P/L with martingales = +$320
Total P/L trading martingales at standard trade size = +$400
As you can see, both modes would turn a profit and the performance is well under 75%.
Now, if they just won only 1 more of those martingales the martingale P/L would be +$680 (70%) and non-martingale (66%) would be $580.
This took me just a few seconds to do... Anyone signing up to a service can easily take the performance from the provider and do the calculation on their own (or soon automatically with our new upcoming tools) using their own trade size and expected return.
$680 (or even $580) would be more than enough profit to also cover their subscription costs.
All this said, I personally hate martingales and wish people wouldn't use them but they are there to use if they choose because people asked and we listened.
I said doing the martingale trades with the same trade size as normal, thus my conclusion is correct.
If you completely remove the martingale trades, of any size, your P/L would be:
16 wins of $100 trade = $180 return = $2880 - $2400 trade volume = $480 profit
I also show an example where it's 62.5% rate for both performances. This is if you use the martingales with $200 or with the same as regular, $100.
In this particular example, yes, removing the martingale trades completely produces a $160 benefit but all 3 scenarios are profitable, thus, none are a losing system.
If you do the other scenario I mentioned, martingale actually generates $200 more in profit than not using martingales at all.
All that said, we're done discussing this.
The performance is there, it's transparent. People can do the math for their own trade sizes/returns and based on their own risk profile can decide if they want to disallow martingales completely or if they want to allow them for a certain size. We don't require clients do either and it's in their complete control whether or not they want to allow them or not.