.
OK folks,
.
Tonight I began the validation test of BumbleBeeFx V1.2 on 9 pairs with custom set files I slightly modulated myself, based on simple pair volatility credentials.
There have been no trades thus far. See attached screenshot.
.
The numerous trades seen today on FPA are said to ne due to the BBFX team experimenting with the minimum holding times, risk levels, and other internal criteria within the FPA EA test account during these past two days. I have explained to Alex how this FPA venue is not the place for experimentation; but, rather must be made sufficiently stable for other owners and users, plus prospects to comprehend and trust what they see. This is now acknowledged.
.
I have been told there is a new release of an even more advanced, updated version V.1.3 of BumbleBeeFx due out shortly that will be supplied to existing owners and new purchasers alike.
Because of the seemingly thoughtless manipulation of the existing test parameters in mid-stream plus the questionable nature of the test broker, Alex has agreed to flatten the account, terminate this test of BumbleBeeFx V1.2 and begin a third, fresh test of the new V1.3 using a more well established broker just as soon as the new version becomes available.
.
He has stated to me that he has received the posted withdrawal of $2000 from his current broker. This returns his initial $500 deposit plus $1500 in profits while BBFX V1.2 continues to trade.
Recent activity with trade lot expansion by ~*15 today was said to be 'accidental' .
Alex explained that he released the EA to control internally its own lot size dynamically, but failed to increase the Stealth SL size as was required, which is used internally to help determine position size.
Although he was profitable today, it was serendipitous and could have been otherwise.
.
This was an additional reason for suggesting he re-start with a clean account and no prior track record at the broker, beginning with the new version.
To be clear, Alex believes the EA was still safe at these levels despite that oversight; however, that remains an open question.
.
The EA's internal risk factor used to set the Money Management risk level was initially set to 10% in the currently published FPA EA test.
For my USA account running 50:1 Leverage Alex recommended 5% on 4 USD pairs; no Gold or Oil.
Instead, I programmed 2.5% on 9 diversified currency pairs using ATC Brokers who can legally offer US clients no restrictions on FIFO or Hedging.
.
FX Investing/Speculation is not meant to be a game of Whack-A-Mole.
Any broker that dares fail to honor their book will truly be eviscerated here.
Shouldn't a word to the wise here be sufficient?
.
Meanwhile; back at the ranch . . .
Alex has entered his BB in a contest account here:
https://www.cashbackforex.com/en-us....aspx?Id=bcbece87-7b83-43e6-9010-944cd7921648
.
as 'AlexFxPro' where you can follow his progress independently of the FPA.
This is not the moment for peacocks second guessing, know-it-all pontification, lurid posturing, or peevish preening.
.
Those of you who know understand that I often make no response to all the self-puffery found around here.
Once in a blue moon someone comes along who just may have devised a disruptive technology that offers the potential to make an impactful contribution and change some things previously thought immutable.
The OTC Forex Markets are rife for such a fatal lunge; just as the SOES traders of 1990 pulled arterial blood from the neck of the OTC Stock Market.
Opportunity appears only for those equipped to recognize and handle it at the moment it becomes available.
.
In the immortal words of Timothy Leary "Turn-on, tune-in, critics drop dead."
Ed: (or something like that)
.
