#14 The True Nature of "Perfect Victory" and Identification of Candidates for the "Holy Grail"
November 15, 2025: Note
In the previous issue, we discussed the mystery of why, even when one is supremely profitable in favorable markets, losses occur over a three-year period.
“Isn’t it the misstep during the ‘blank period’ that the EA struggles with, causing steady losses?”
This was the hypothesis we shared.
However, before advancing that hypothesis, we must report the verification results for the homework from the previous issue,the total number of trades.
Shocking fact: The essence of “all wins” In short,
many of the astonishing numbers like “All Wins” or “PF 19.12” were
“because the number of trades was extremely small (about 2 to 10 trades).”
※ Watch legs / settle legs
・ Chart 4H / 1M (Downward): 2 trades (All Wins)
・ Back chart 4H / 1M (Downward): 2 trades (All Wins)
・ Back chart 4H / 1M (Upward): 4 trades (All Wins)
・ Chart 1H / 1M (Downward): 2 trades (All Wins)
These were a lucky punch where the logic happened to fit perfectly during that period, and it was still too early to call it statistical edge (holy grail).
The only hope: the potential of “1H / 1M”
However, there is no need to despair.
Among them, one set stood out clearly different from the rest,holding genuine potentialas data that shines.
・ Back chart 1H / 1M (Upward): 22 trades (All Wins)
・ Back chart 1H / 1M (Range): 28 trades (PF 6.67, Win rate 85%)
・ Chart 1H / 1M (Range): 22 trades (PF 5.18, Win rate 90%)
In particular, the “Back chart 1H / 1M” traded a total of 50 times in a range market and an upward trend, and nearly stayed winning! That cannot be explained as merely luck.
This setting (Back chart 1H / 1M) is surely the closest to a “holy grail.”
The biggest mystery: Then why did it lose over the three-year run?
Here I recall the graph of the three-year run.
The graph was generally upward, butthere was a large drawdown at the end.
However, in the periods I visually selected (upward, downward, range, turning point), this strongest candidate’s “Back chart 1H / 1M” never lost (note: downward PF 19.12, turning point no trades).
What on earth does this mean?
The answer ties back to the hypothesis I discussed last time“the steady losses during the blank period.”This is the thread.
The three-year loss period did not occur in any of the periods I selected by sight (upward, downward, range, turning point).In other words,it was not included in those periods.
That, perhaps, is the true nemesis for this EA: a market that is low in volatility and lacks clear direction—a choppy market.
Accumulating small losses (steady losses) in that tough market led to the drawdown at the end of the three-year chart.
Next step: identify the dreaded period
To prove my hypothesis, there is only one next step.
Carefully re-examine the three-year chart of the “Back chart 1H / 1M,” andidentify the period (date) where the big drop occurs at the end.
Extract only that “dreaded period” and run a backtest; if the steady losses reappear there, the weakness of this EA will be laid bare!
Next issue:
Finally identify the true nature of the dreaded period!
However, what is discovered there is not the “steady losses”…?
An unexpected record of a big loss.
その原因を追ううちに、私は
※
The EA I am developing is meant to automate, for anyone to implement manually, the method introduced in the second episode that allows you to win even without scalping.
This is currently the only paid article in this series.
150 yen!Cheap!... President, cheap! ٩(ˊᗜˋ*)و
× ![]()
