Head to head
Neo DeltavsZerqon EA
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.
Neo Delta 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
- 2.20▲
- 1.36▲
- Payoff ratioAverage win divided by average loss
- 0.44▲
- 0.18▲
- Max drawdownDeepest fall from a previous high
- 6.7%▲
- 17.7%▲
- Recovery factorNet profit per unit of worst fall
- 1.20▲
- 4.61▲
- Growth per monthTotal growth compounded to a monthly rate
- 19.95%▲
- 27.34%▲
- Win rateNot scored — a high win rate is only good if the payoff supports it
- 83.3%▲
- 88.5%▲
- Record lengthHow much evidence there is
- 0 months▲
- 7 months▲
- TradesSample size behind every figure above
- 6▲
- 1,500▲
- Total growthNot comparable on its own — the records cover different spans
- 8.1%▲
- 442.7%▲
- Account sizePercentages compound faster on a small balance
- $500▲
- $300▲
Why these two are not quite like-for-like
- One record is 17.5× longer than the other — Zerqon EA has had more time to meet a market it dislikes, which cuts both ways when reading its drawdown.
What each record shows
MT5 · Expert Advisor · XAUUSD
Neo Delta
No risk flags raised by the trade history.
Measured from trade history · 6 trades · 0 months
Read the full page →MT5 · Expert Advisor · XAUUSD
Zerqon EA
- Grid / basket positions
- Small wins, large losses
Measured from trade history · 1,500 trades · 7 months
Read the full page →