Tested extensively, failed to produce any profit for me
Service use: Live
Length of use: 6-12 Months
This is my third and final review of the 1000 pip climber system. I wrote my first in February after using the system for 6 months, it did not perform well in that period as I reported in my review, but I wrote a second intermediary review after Jim the owner of the system had made contact appealing to me to try again. I agreed with Jim to try the system over a 3 month period before writing a final review. I have actually reviewed it over 4 months. Prior to commencing this latest test, I liaised with Jim to ensure that our results would be as closely aligned as possible, so that’s using an IC markets RAW account (no spread) and trading all 6 pairs, on all 3 timeframes, so 18 charts in total, and on settings - all charts were set to default take profit 2. Default TP2 is always the same pip value as the stop loss, so regardless of chart or pair, each trade is working on a 1:1 risk/reward basis, whether its 20 pip SL / 20 pip TP on USDJPY 15 minutes or 110 pip SL / 110 pip TP on EURUSD 4 hours.
The main performance claim of the system is that it achieved 20,000 pips over a 3 year period, or c. 550 pips a month. My results were as follows:
March +495 pips
April -340 pips
May -240 pips
June +75 pips
= -10 (minus 10) pips over the 4 month period.
This was well short of the c. 2200 pips I was hoping for after 4 months. Half way into my test Jim pointed out to me that the system should be traded on a win / loss basis and not pip cumulation. I had standardised my lot size on all 18 charts, meaning a 20 pip win would be worth £2, a 30 pip win would be £3 and a 50 pip win, £50. Despite it being called the “1000 pip climber system” and its main performance claim being 20,000 pips over three years, Jim said the way you are supposed to trade the system is actually to adjust lot size depending on TP value, so that each win has the same ££ value, whether is a 20 pip win or a 110 pip win.
Working on a win / loss basis with a 1:1 risk to reward, a user needs a win rate of +50% for the system to be profitable. In actual fact for me and most other traders, the break even point after accounting from spread and broker commission needs to be c. 52.5%. I also worked out based on the trading volume and the fact that the average win or loss tends to be around 25 or 26 pips, that the win rate required to achieve 20,000 pips over 3 years would be around 62%.
Over the 561 trades in my 4 month period, the win rate was 52.31%, so actually just under my profitability line. That data set is also sufficiently large for me to conclude the “true” underlying win rate of the system is probably in the 50-54% range. In fact a binomial probability calculator (Free Binomial Probability Confidence Interval Calculator - Free Statistics Calculators (danielsoper.com) ) would say with that data you can be 95% confident that the true win rate is in the range of 0.47720 ≤ p ≤ 0.56654. For any 1:1 system, the win rate range should be more like 56-65% to ensure you will always be trading above a profitability line.
The system also performed with a high level of volatility. The worst 50 trade rolling win rate I saw was a 19.61% and the best 80.39%. Depending on when you start using the system you could experience one of those streaks and think it is awful or amazing. Most traders want to see strong balance line stability or a smooth upwards equity curve, but this appears like a jagged line, long losing streaks (with potentially big drawdowns depending on your risk level) and long winning streaks.
During the 4 month period Jim was sharing his results with me and I was able to compare mine with his on a spreadsheet. Despite setting up the system in the same way, our results did not align. My MT4 account saw around 20% more trades than his, and his win rate was higher at 60%. Jim was unable to explain why we were experiencing different results, using the same system, with the same settings.
By his own admission he does not use the EA add on (this is software designed by a guy called Christoph, see my previous review for full explanation) and so Jim does not take every single trade, whereas I was using the EA add on and so taking every trade. However it feels highly unlikely that in the 20% of trades that I took and he didn’t there would be a very high concentration of winners that would drag his win rate up to 60% compared to my 52%. Jim did suggest that the EA add on could be responsible for the difference, but over the 4 month period, he did no tests to my knowledge to investigate the EA add on, and he also continues to promote it in monthly emails to 1000 pip climber system users. Of course it could be that all other users of the system are experiencing a 60% win rate and there is some fault somewhere in my set up which causes the poorer performance. But via FPA or facebook I have been unable to find any users of this system who are seeing a 60% win rate. And in any case its alarming that users experience different results with an automated robotic system. Any EA or signals creator should publish or at least run a “master” set of results which users should expect to emulate. You can’t show someone some roses and then post them a bunch of random seeds.
Again I wanted this system to work because it makes logical sense, and it feels like creator has put a lot of work into it, and has a strong customer service ethic. But the results don’t lie. I tested the system for a long enough period, and built up a sizeable data set, but it just didn’t make me any money, so I’ll be moving onto other things.
As per my last review, if you would like to make contact with me please do so via the profile link top right of this page, I’m happy to share further information and all performance spreadsheets.
Mar 4, 2021 - 4 Stars My initial results with 1000PCS were not overly positive as per my original review, but I have since been in contact with the owner Jim and and he is supporting me to try this system again. We have identified that there may be an issue with how the 1000 Pip climber EA operates with the 1000 pip climber system. Just to be very clear, the 1000 pip climber system is a long established signals based system run by Jim in the UK. 1000 pip climber EA is an EA, run by Christop in Germany, it is designed to take the signals generated by the 1000 pip climber system and automatically set up pending orders (rather than the trader having to manually set up their pending order trades using Jim's signals).
Jim has shared with me some more encouraging recent results and I hope and think I have re set up the 1000 pip climber system, with EA, in the correct way to hopefully mirror those results. We aim to compare weekly, so I know everything is working correctly. I mentioned this in my first review, but Jim the owner clearly cares about trading and customer service, so I am impressed that he has reached out to me and we are working to ensure I get the best possible results from the system. I will report back in due course or you can message me directly via my username if you want to ask more about this system. Just to finally add I was offered a refund but did not accept it, so no refund has played a part in me writing this additional review.
Feb 7, 2021 - 2 Stars I signed up to the 1000 PCS in July 2020, generally encouraged by the reviews, although the historic pip win performance claimed was a little hard to verify. The system is quite simple and relies on a range break out strategy across 6 pairs and 3 timeframes, so potentially you can run it on 18 charts in total. Basically if a pair is trading in tight ranging conditions, orders are placed just above and below the range and then if price goes down up and breaks the range, the order is filled and price is supposed to continue to TP. There are three TP levels, 1,2, and 3 and after a bit of experimentation I settled on TP2, which generally equates to a 1:1 risk ratio and seems to be the most commonly used amongst users.
Initially I found the system hard to keep up with although that was slightly my fault as I set up alerts for all 6 pairs on all 3 timeframes. It meant alerts were coming through thick and fast, and I wouldn’t always be by my laptop to set the orders. Then someone made an EA for the system, which was a great idea. 1000 PCS is not in EA in itself, it is more akin to a signal system which sends you alerts advising where to set orders, stop losses and TPs, but the EA sits on your MT4 account and effectively sets the orders which are generated by 1000PCS. It’s a real time saver, especially if you want to try it over multiple signals and timeframes.
Ultimately though it just didn’t work for me. My results were as follows: September -29.4% change in account balance and 44.3% win rate October -25.6% and 44.0% win rate November +50% and 65.1% win rate December +5.8% and 53.0% win rate January -58.9% and 37.7% win rate
I should add I set the EA to 2% risk to trade and Jim advises 1%, but had I gone 1% it just would have reduced the gains / reductions in above account balances by half. I really, really wanted this system to work, the strategy looked sound and Jim who runs it is great from a customer service point of view, there is extensive pdf guide to trading and the system which you get when you purchase, and anyone who invests that much time in their craft clearly cares about it. But the results don’t lie. And I feel 6 months is enough time to fully evaluate a system, it trades often enough to generate enough trading data for a user to be statistically confident the results seen are close to what would be repeated over the long term.
Has potential but unnerving and trades infrequently
Service use: Live
Length of use: 0-3 Months
FPA do a live test for this EA and it seemed to be performing reasonably well at c. 6-7% a month so I thought it was worth exploring. It only trades AUDUSD, and it trades infrequently. Now I like to see a lot of activity, I essentially want to see my EAs trading often and consistently, so I can have confidence in the results and I have a decent data set from which to extrapolate the potential. But from 11th March to 25th May it only traded 7 times, granted they were all wins, but I have no idea if the win rate is supposed to be near 100% or if its supposed to be 60% and I have had a really good streak. Its not trading often enough for me to tell and I don’t have the patience to wait. What is frustrating aswell is how it manages risk, when trades are opened the stop loss is way way off into the distance, 1000+ pips away. All the completed trades opened like this, which is very disconcerting. Because if the trade starts going against you I assume the EA at some point moves the stop loss closer to price to ensure your loss is limited. But I don’t have a sense of when the stop loss moves, or why it is set so far away in the first place, which is very unnerving. I’ve just given up the ghost as I have now had three trades open 17, 15 and 14 days, two buys and a sell. So I'm basically in a hedged position, stop losses are miles away, so unless prices undulates pretty severely and to just the right levels, I’m going to lose start losing some of the modest profit I have made so far. This one has potential but you probably need to adopt some ambivalence about how it works and be prepared to let it run for a while.
Bounce trader kept coming up on my social media feeds, proclaiming 900% profits within a few months and I thought I would give it a go. Even if it performs significantly below the claimed performance it would still be highly profitable right?
I ran Bounce Trader on a small account (£250 deposit) for two weeks and it lost 12.9% over that time with a 40% win rate. Now Leap Fx to their credit do offer a money back guarantee within the first 30 days, as most traders know, an edge will play out and always win over the long term, and 30 days isn't really long enough to fully evaluate a system, but I wasn't exactly encouraged by the 14 day performance. If Bounce Trader can grow an account balance by 900% over a few months the a 13% drop in the first 2 weeks would represent a seriously unlucky start.
After liaising with Leap FX I switched to a more expensive EA - The Skilled Trader and deposited some recent profits from another account. This was money I could afford to lose, so I was happy to ramp up the risk and expect potentially large draw downs. Here are the results:
October 2020 - 55 wins, 34 losses, 61.8% Win rate, but account down -17% (you can see loss sizes much bigger than win sizes
November 2020 - 49 wins, 27 losses, 64.5% win rate, account UP 74% (this was where I got excited)
December 2020 - 42 wins, 43 losses, 49.4% win rate, account down -60.1%
Jan 2020 (to Jan 20th when I finally gave up the ghost) 11 wins, 21 losses, 34.4% win rate, account down another 76%.
It was the inconsistency that really bothered me. Yes my risk scaling was high, but a system that has such a volatile win rate, and can generate 74% in one month and lose 60% in the next, looks like a system with too many variables and not a tight enough strategy. Would not recommend.
I had high hopes for Odin, its advertised on a professional looking website and the advertised results are very impressive. Unfortunately I had to abandon it after 2 months due to a number a of problems.
The first issue is that the EA has a huge number of variable settings, the developers will advise you to go with default but over my time using the EA, they recommended different settings to try and improve my results (more of which later). Probably like most traders I prefer my EAs to have a specific strategy which needs tight parameters. If you have an EA with multiple, multiple, variable settings, then the permutations are infinite, and effectively I can set the EA to do something very different from the dev’s original strategy, and if I’m doing that then its not really an automated strategy anymore, it becomes more “manual” the more control you can have over what it does.
The second issue is that it seems to be tradeable on any pair, and their published results reflect that, you will see trades for a wide range of pairs, which again for me casts doubt on the efficacy of the underlying strategy. If it can work on any pair, how does that take into account varying volatility between different pairs, and the specific relationships between the bigger volume pairs? Initially I set Odin to work on a range of pairs, essentially trying to copy their published results, and it performed well, over 39 trading days in July and August 2020, Odin was up 11% with a win rate of 72%, but then after a series of losses the account dropped by 21%. I struggled to understand the underlying R:R ratios, the wins were modest, and the losses were larger in terms of value. Surprise surprise there were also differences between my results and the official results, which are published live on their website. Some of the trades matches up, but a lot didn’t, and after emailing support they replied:
When comparing trades, please keep the following things in mind:
1) Most brokers use odd time offsets (GMT offsets) as a way to confuse your indicators. These offsets lead to differing chart times for prices between brokers.
2) Brokers are free to quote prices and spreads as they wish. So if your broker is spread widening or altering price your signals may differ.
3) Things like if you were in a trade on a pair already, if you had a low account balance, or if the spread widened too far can all lead to different trades as well.
Another week later and again I compared my trade results to their published results, and again I emailed to say:
My Odin yesterday recorded 2 wins and 6 losses for a 25% win rate, and my overall account balance fell by -3.65%.
Your Odin recorded 70 wins and 5 losses, for a 93% win rate, and a nice increase in account balance.https://www.forexrobottrader.com/results/Odin%20Robot/latest_results.htm
How can the same robot perform so differently?
In their response they simply referred me back to their 9/7/20 email, which wasn’t particularly helpful. But they did also send me some new custom settings, which I was happy to try. I blindly implemented the new settings and then realised a few days later that they had NO stop loss? Odin had entered firstly into one trade and price had gone against me, the loss position kept growing and then it happened on a second trade, I would be recording small wins in the background on other pairs, but eventually all trades on all charts were running as losers, with no SL in their recommended settings to help me get out. Before long all my margin was consumed in the multiple losing trades, and with no SL, my only hope was that some of them would return to profitable positions, hit TP as wins, and release some margin to allow Odin to breathe again. Until then no new trades could be opened as I had no available margin! In the end I had to close all the trades, take the losses and hope to start again.
I tried again, but exactly the same scenario started to happen a few days later, at which point I gave up.
I emailed support yet again to query why the customised settings they sent me had no stop loss, and they replied to offer me a new robot called Equity Trail! As far as I could see Equity Trail does little more than SL and TP management, and there are multiple SL and TP settings in Odin itself, so I couldn’t understand why they couldn’t just tell me what settings to apply on the actual EA, rather than recommending a totally new bot!
I don’t like leaving negative reviews, but my overall experience of Odin was just infuriating. Support were responsive and kind of helpful, but after numerous back and forths we just couldn’t get it to work. And I resent the fact that I bought the EA hoping to replicate their published results and the got nowhere close.
Flawed EA, has anyone actually had long term success with Steam?
Service use: Live
Length of use: 0-3 Months
I bought Forex Steam based on the general weight of reviews in its favour. It picks good trades but it is flawed in that the default stop loss is set to 90 pips, default take profit is set to 10 pips. That means it needs a 90%+ win rate to be profitable, and given there is not alot of room between 90% and 100% it doesn't leave much margin for error.
Support will tell you that the pip retrace feature will kick in to ensure that your losses are rarely 90 pips. Take a really close look at the results on their website and you will see that between 1.1.2020 and 31.7.2020 they had only 18 losing trades, all at 10 or 20 pips, so basically if their official results are using the default 90 pip SL, then the pip retrace feature is kicking in every single time.
Meanwhile in one single month (July) I also had 18 losing trades, only 7 of which used the pip retrace feature. So I had 11 losing trades, losing 90 pips each in one month and they had no 90 pip losing trades in 6 months. Support will tell you there will always be variation between their published results and your results because of brokers / spread differences, news etc, but those results are worlds apart, the difference between profitable and very much not profitable. My account crashed 80% with steam and I have removed it from my charts. My last two emails to support on 18.7.20 and 21.7.20 have gone unanswered.
Look hard enough on the internet / facebook and you will find others who have experienced the same issues with Steam, I have not been able to find anyone who gets even close to the results they claim. If anyone genuinely is having LONG TERM success with steam please post how in a review. One of the stock responses from support is "its working fine for 000s of other clients", which doesn't really mean anything, it just implies its your problem. If there are people out there getting the 20-40% monthly gains claimed possible, where are they? Forex Steam should have a legion of brand ambassadors helping the newbies and discussing how great Steam is in FB forums. Strange that they don't seem to exist.