Head to head

AI Aurum PivotvsOnyx MT5

Both sets of figures are computed the same way from each product's own record. The measures that can be read against each other — the unit-free ratios — are scored. The ones that depend on how big the account was or how long it ran are shown underneath, unscored, because putting a winner on them would be comparing two different questions.

AI Aurum Pivot leads on 3 of the 5 measures that can be scored.

A count of rows, not a recommendation. Which of these measures matters is a question about the account it would run on.

Profit factorEverything won divided by everything lost: 2.05; 3.54▲
Payoff ratioAverage win divided by average loss: 1.87▲; 0.17
Max drawdownDeepest fall from a previous high: 8.6%▲; 18.9%
Recovery factorNet profit per unit of worst fall: 10.97▲; 6.80
Growth per monthTotal growth compounded to a monthly rate: 11.92%; 46.69%▲
Win rateNot scored — a high win rate is only good if the payoff supports it: 52.2%; 95.3%
Record lengthHow much evidence there is: 8 months; 5 months
TradesSample size behind every figure above: 90; 64
Total growthNot comparable on its own — the records cover different spans: 154.2%; 595.8%
Account sizePercentages compound faster on a small balance: $300; $1,000

Full pageView AI Aurum Pivot →View Onyx MT5 →

Why these two are not quite like-for-like

One record is 1.6× longer than the other — AI Aurum Pivot has had more time to meet a market it dislikes, which cuts both ways when reading its drawdown.
The tracked accounts are 3× apart in size. Percentage growth compounds much faster on a small balance, so the growth figures are not the like-for-like they look.

What each record shows

MT5 · Expert Advisor · XAUUSD

AI Aurum Pivot

Nothing in the published figures raised a flag. The checks that need trade-level data could not be run.

Measured from published statistics · 90 trades · 8 months

Read the full page →