Before listing, I submerged four rods — the inspection I perform before I list the EA

A few days ago, I created four new EAs, and I decided not to list all four.

It wasn’t that I couldn’t make them. All of them worked. The reason I didn’t list them was that all four failed the inspections I always run before listing.

In this article, I will disclose the contents of those inspections. It’s meant to help people who are considering my EAs understand “what checks this seller performs before listing a product.” At the same time, I believe these perspectives can be used when choosing any seller’s EA.

Inspection 1: Decide performance using “net profit” including fees and swaps

The one that failed this time appeared, from my own transaction log calculations, to be +1,545 dollars over ten and a half years. When reviewed by official reports using net profit, it was +21 dollars. The difference is fees and swaps.

All the figures on my product pages are shown as “net profit” because I know this difference. In actual operation, what remains in your account is the net profit.

Inspection 2: Split the validation period by era

Another one, if you look at the most recent four and a half years, would have passed. But when you isolate the quiet market from 2016 to 2021, it consistently lost.

The current market is, historically speaking, unusually favorable. The performance under favorable conditions and the resilience shown against headwinds are considered separately. If you were to release it as a design specialized for recent markets, clearly state that on the product page—that is also my rule.

Inspection 3: Plan funds based on observed drawdowns

The final candidate had a record of as many as 19 consecutive losses over ten and a half years of testing. I could hide this and list it, but I won’t. The actual drawdown data is the most practical information for buyers to determine a safe lot size.

The reason I already post the proportion of losing months and the maximum drawdown amount on my existing product pages is the same.

Inspection 4: Accepting total elimination

The most important inspection is actually about attitude. When the test results are poor, you can adjust conditions afterward to make the numbers look favorable. I don’t do that; when a method fails, I skip listing it.

This time I passed on four EAs, and even the final candidate was kept idle during the uncontacted period (2011–2015) and did not meet the passing criteria, so it is marked as “on hold.” In other words, this batch has zero listings. Not listing items that fail to meet the standard is what I believe provides assurance that the numbers of currently listed products can be trusted.

You can apply this inspection to your own methods

If you want to turn years of discretionary methods or your own rules into an EA, please consult from the “Estimate Consultation” on my listing page. After implementing it, I will subject it to the same inspections as above (10-year validation, net profit evaluation, era segmentation, measured drawdowns). If the results fail, I will honestly provide you with the validation data as well.

I cannot promise you will win. What I can promise is that I will not lie in the inspections.

Here are the EAs that passed inspections and are for sale (you can also send inquiries from this page).
XAU Session Sniper 【ORB】｜ Gold-exclusive Opening Range Breakout EA