Comments for https://ctrader.com/products/1879

Hi, thanks for the detailed analysis - I see what you’re referring to.

First, I need to clarify an important point.

The backtest package in Google Drive and the public Myfxbook account you mentioned were not run or managed by me. These were set up and published by the store team as part of their internal testing/optimization process.

Because of that, I don’t have visibility into: their exact configuration, their testing methodology, or any additional setup they may have used.

So for any questions specifically related to: that backtest package or the Myfxbook account behavior, the correct place to get a precise answer is the Store support team ( support@ctrader.com), since they are the ones who ran and published those results.

From my side, I can clarify how the bot itself works:

Preset modes (LowRisk / HighRisk etc.) use predefined configurations, but they do not include any hidden runtime logic beyond what is implemented in the bot. There is no separate “secret engine” running behind presets.

Custom mode gives you access to the same core mechanics, but through manually controlled parameters. However, presets are often tuned for specific conditions and may behave differently compared to a static Custom setup, especially in terms of:

timing distribution of trades
interaction between limits (MaxTrades, session, rebuild, etc.)
and how quickly the grid deploys during active periods

This can create the impression that presets are “more dynamic”, while in reality it’s a result of how multiple parameters interact together.

But again, regarding the specific results you referenced (Google Drive / Myfxbook), I would strongly recommend contacting the Store team (support@ctrader.com) directly, as they can explain exactly how those runs were configured.

Hi,
You are right.
'Custom' mode allows you to configure all parameters manually, while the other presets load predefined hardcoded settings built into the cBot.

Hi,

When Seed Direction = Auto, the bot uses a very simple momentum check - it compares the current close with the close a few bars back (up to 5 bars). If price has moved up over that period, it seeds a Buy; if it moved down, it seeds a Sell. There are no indicators involved here (no RSI, MACD, or moving averages), just a basic short-term price direction check.

It’s also important to note that this only affects the initial seed trade. It does not control the grid direction - in Maya, the grid side is set separately and there is no built-in trend filter for it.

For comparison, in Inca cBot the 'Auto' mode is more advanced - both the seed direction and grid alignment can be based on EMA direction, which helps avoid entries against stronger trends.

Most likely this happened because you were running the bot with the High Risk 2026 preset selected. In preset mode, the bot uses the hardcoded values inside the preset, and manual changes in the parameter panel do not take effect.

For High Risk 2026, the internal preset values are:
Close Losing Basket at -Money = 216
Daily Loss Limit = 25%
Floating Drawdown Limit = 25%
Max Drawdown (Start Equity) = 50%

So if your panel was showing 45 / 15 / 25 while High Risk 2026 was active, the bot was still operating using the preset’s built-in values, not the manually entered ones.

So yes - this behaviour can be correct in that case.

If you want the bot to follow your own values, please switch:
Preset = Custom
enter your manual settings
restart the bot

Hi,
Maya is a grid system, so you can’t lock it to a strict 5% risk and 1:1.5 RR per individual trade the way you would with a single-entry setup.

The better approach is to keep the risk controls fixed:
*Optional SL per Level
*Close Losing Basket at -Money
*Daily Loss Limit
*Floating Drawdown Limit
*Max Drawdown (Start Equity)

and let the optimizer work on the strategy structure:
*ATR Multiplier / grid step
*Levels per Side
*Basket TP
*Volume Multiplier
*Max Total Volume
*TP per Level

That way you keep the downside controlled while optimizing how the grid actually performs.

Hi,

I understand why this raises concerns. In short, the issue is usually not that the bot somehow “works differently by itself” in live trading, but that live trading and backtesting are not the same environment, even when the exact same preset is used.

Even over the exact same calendar period, backtest data and live execution conditions can differ materially, and that alone is enough to cause different results. In the tester, trades are modeled on historical ticks under defined assumptions, while live trading adds real spread, commission, slippage, execution delay, and the actual sequence of incoming ticks. For a grid strategy on XAUUSD, even small differences in execution can lead to a completely different grid development path.

The High Risk preset is especially sensitive to real trading conditions on Gold. Even with the same preset, differences in spread, commission, slippage, execution delay, broker feed, session timing, and tick sequence can completely change how the grid gets filled and how the whole cycle develops.

High Risk should be viewed as a demonstration of the strategy’s potential on a specific historical window, not as a guaranteed live profile. The more aggressive the preset, the larger the gap between backtest and live can become if volatility changes, the market becomes more directional, or execution is worse than what the tester assumes.

What is recommended next.
Do not use High Risk as a live baseline without adaptation.
Switch to Custom mode and optimize the key parameters for the real account conditions:
*ATR Multiplier / grid step
*Levels per Side
*Basket TP
*Volume Multiplier
*Max Total Volume
*Basket Cut / drawdown controls

For live trading, it is usually better to reduce aggression:
widen the grid step,
reduce the number of levels,
cap total volume more tightly,
use a firmer basket cut,
and, if needed, enable per-level SL or a time stop.

Optimization should be done on recent data from the same broker, and then validated on a separate out-of-sample period.
After that, it is recommended to run the setup on a demo account under the same broker conditions and fine-tune it further if needed before moving to live trading.

The site is currently temporarily unavailable due to technical issues. We are working to restore it as soon as possible

Andyfields, have u used the default presets?

The minimum capital really depends on your broker conditions - mainly leverage, spread, commission structure.

Optimally, I’d say starting from around $1,000 gives the strategy enough room to operate more comfortably.
That said, the bot can technically run on a $200 account, but risk increases significantly as the margin buffer becomes very limited.

I recommend testing this properly using the free version of the bot (made specifically for backtesting/optimisation). Run backtests with your broker’s real conditions (tick data, spread/commission, leverage) and try different starting balances. This will show you what minimum capital level you’re personally comfortable with before going live.

Keep in mind this is XAUUSD (gold) and it’s a grid strategy. Gold is volatile, and grid systems need margin space to handle temporary floating drawdown before recovery. On a small balance, the algorithm has much less room to execute the strategy properly, so performance can become less stable and forced exits are more likely.