#13 Why can't we win with three years in a row? The true nature of the “devil’s blank period”
November 14, 2025: Note
Until the previous issue, we have witnessed amazing data.
- In both rising and falling trends, both "front-end" and "back-end" versions can win.
- Even in range markets, it delivers an incredibly high PF (Profit Factor).
- There are settings that safely navigate even during turning points.
“…Huh? Isn’t this already the Holy Grail?”
It was a perfect result that makes you think so.
However, one big question surfaced for me at this point.
“Then, why when testing for three years in a row does it perform so poorly (even negative)?”
Why does an EA that produced such wonderful results lose in long-term testing?
The rule that uses only one position shouldn’t be wrong.
It isn’t because the risk / reward is exceptionally bad…。
Hmmm... what on earth is the cause? (^o^;)
Hypothesis: Gradual losses during “blank periods”
The key to solving this greatest mystery lay in the very test period I chose by visual inspection.
My view is as follows.
This EA is,a “specialist” that demonstrates exceptional strength in clear trends or range markets (i.e., volatile markets).
However, over a long period of three years, it includes many periods of markets that are not the “clear markets” I selected by eye,aside fromthe“unclear markets.”
In these kinds of “markets the EA struggles with,” there should be a“blank period”that was present in the period I visually selected.
Cause of defeat mechanism: “Hundred0 Slaps of Death” state
So why does it lose in those “difficult markets”?
The logic of the beard-trimming method is a strategy of waiting quietly and not chasing the trend that has broken the cycle’s high or low, and waiting for the market to come back.
Favored markets (trends or ranges)
Because volatility is high, after reaching the waiting spot, it moves quickly toward the profit direction (TP1) before a tight stop is hit.
That’s why it produces astonishing numbers like “all wins” or “PF 19.12.”
Unfavored markets (choppy markets)
Because volatility is low and there is no clear direction, prices wander around near the target.
1. Break the target and come back, so enter (e.g., buy)
2. But it reverses immediately and hits a tight stop (stop-out) at M1. → Small loss
3. Wander around the target again and meet entry conditions again.
4. Enter → Immediately stop-out. → Small loss
5. This repeats endlessly.
Indeed, the method adopted in that “Holy Grail setting (H1/M1, etc.)”too-tight stops (M1 settlements) become a bane here.
In favorable markets it yields large profits (gradual wins), but in unfavorable markets it accumulates small losses endlessly, like a “slip-sliding away” (gradual losses).
Conclusion
The three-year overall performance is mediocre becausethe “gradual losses” in the hidden “blank periods” were repeated many times in the difficult marketsthereby devouring the massive profits earned in the favorable markets.
This is all of my reasoning so far.
Next:
Finally, the true nature of “all wins” will be revealed!
What is the genuine Holy Grail candidate seen when checking the number of trades?
But why does it lose when tested for three years…?
Identify the “devil period” hidden in the graphs and approach the greatest mystery!
※
The EA I am working on automates what I introduced in Episode 2, which anyone can achieve manually.
“A method that wins even without scalping is possible”I am working on automating that.
This is the only paid article in this series (so far).
150 yen!So cheap!... President, so cheap! ٩(ˊᗜˋ*)و
× ![]()
