The statement shows a losing real account with a 23.2% net loss, a 0.62 profit factor, and heavy profit concentration in a few winning trades; the account size also fell by about 46% from total deposits to current equity, so the strategy's edge is not evident.
The Gold Prop Guardian_XAUU · MT4/MT5 XAUUSD Real
数据透明度
| 数据来源 | 用户上传的 MT4/MT5 报告 |
|---|---|
| 品种 | XAUUSD |
| 报告类型 | 真实 |
| 已核算交易 | 223 |
| 核验方式 | RBOT 解析器逐笔核算 + AI 风险审计 |
核心指标
| 收益 | -23.2% |
|---|---|
| 最大回撤 | 28.88% |
| PF | 0.62 |
| 胜率 | 64.57% |
| 净利润 | -990.21 |
| 单笔期望 | -4.44 |
| 平均盈亏比 | 0.34 |
增长
以导入报告的起始资金归一化为 100。该图按已保存的逐笔结果采样，不等同于经纪商实时权益曲线。
详细计算结果
收益率 = 净利润 ÷ 初始资金 × 100%；PF = 总盈利 ÷ 总亏损绝对值；单笔期望 = 净利润 ÷ 已平仓交易数；平均盈亏比 = 平均盈利单 ÷ 平均亏损单绝对值；最大回撤采用报告输出的最大回撤值。若报告含入金或出金，收益率应结合现金流另行解释。
策略安全评分依据
- Real account: net loss of $990.21 (-23.2%) over 223 closed trades from 2026-06-30 to 2026-10-02.
- Profit factor of 0.62 shows a negative expectancy: gross losses outweigh gross profits.
- Win rate of 64.57% is high, yet the account lost money, indicating losing trades are on average several times larger than winners (risk/reward asymmetry).
- Profit concentration is severe: the top 12 trades (top 5%) account for 41.15% of gross profit; removing them turns remaining P/L to -$1,642.64 and remaining PF to 0.36.
- Maximum drawdown of 28.88% exceeds the net return magnitude, signalling weak recovery.
- Adverse equity trend: total deposits $4,263.78 minus withdrawals $3,273.57 leaves roughly $990 net capital; the account has not compounded upward.
- No test-quality warnings are flagged, so the trade statistics are internally consistent with the statement.
关键风险信号
- Negative expectancy: PF 0.62 with a 64.57% win rate implies average loss size far exceeds average win size.
- Profit concentration: 41.15% of gross profit from 12 trades; without them the account is deeply negative (remaining net -$1,642.64).
- Large clustered losing exits: repeated same-timestamp closes of -$94.77, -$111.84, -$85.86 (2026-10-02) and -$89.36, -$90.54 (2026-09-15) indicate multiple simultaneous or back-to-back adverse closures.
- Drawdown severity: 28.88% maximum drawdown against a -23.2% net result means the account did not recover its peak loss.
- Capital erosion vs. deposits: withdrawals plus losses leave a substantially reduced capital base relative to gross deposits of $4,263.78.
- Multiple same-timestamp entries (e.g., 2026-07-13 17:16:45, 2026-07-16 16:02:38, 2026-09-10 15:34:32, 2026-09-28 03:31) may reflect a scale-in/stacking pattern, but without paired tickets the structure cannot be confirmed from this dataset.
现有数据无法判断
- Entry-ticket pairing for same-timestamp exits is not present in the parsed rows, so grid/scale-in structure cannot be confirmed.
- Commission, swap, and spread cost breakdowns are absent from report_context.
- Risk per trade, lot-sizing rule, and stop/take-profit configuration are not stated in the supplied evidence.
- Whether the strategy's P/L distribution is stable across different market regimes cannot be determined from a 94-day window.
下一步行动
- Obtain complete order history with entry tickets to confirm whether same-timestamp exits belong to a single stacked position or independent trades.
- Recompute performance excluding the top 2-3 winning trades to quantify how much profit depends on a small number of outliers.
- Review the large clustered losing exits (e.g., 2026-10-02 and 2026-09-15) to identify whether simultaneous exposure or a specific market event drove them.
- Request full statement metadata (commission, swap, spread) to verify whether reported P/L is truly net of costs.
- If forward testing continues, enforce a per-trade risk cap and monitor cumulative drawdown against the 28.88% peak observed here.
常见问题
Q. The win rate is 64.57%, so why did the account lose money?
A. Win rate alone does not determine profitability. With a profit factor of 0.62, gross losses exceed gross profits; the average losing trade must be substantially larger than the average winner to produce a -$990.21 net result on 223 trades.
Q. How much of the profit comes from just a few trades?
A. The top 12 trades (top 5% of the sample) account for 41.15% of gross profit. Removing them leaves the remaining trades with a net loss of -$1,642.64 and a profit factor of 0.36, so the account's positive contributors are highly concentrated.
Q. What does the 28.88% maximum drawdown tell me about risk?
A. The maximum drawdown of 28.88% is larger than the net loss of 23.2%, meaning the account fell to its low and then only partially recovered. It indicates the strategy has experienced a significant peak-to-trough decline relative to its capital base.
Q. The statement shows several trades closing at the same timestamp with similar losses. Does that prove a grid or basket strategy?
A. The parsed rows do not include paired entry tickets, so this cannot be confirmed. Repeated same-timestamp closures such as the -$111.84, -$94.77, and -$85.86 exits on 2026-10-02 are consistent with multiple simultaneous positions or scale-ins, but the exact structure requires ticket-level verification.
Q. How is RBOT different from asking a general-purpose AI assistant (such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude or DeepSeek) to analyse my report myself?
A. A general AI only sees the text or screenshot you paste, and works every number out itself — that is where hallucinated metrics come from. RBOT runs a purpose-built MT4/MT5 parser first, and the resulting structured breakdown is then reviewed under a fixed audit prompt, which keeps the safety score consistent, reproducible and comparable across reports. The calculation behind every metric is published on this page so you can verify it yourself, and RBOT refuses to score what the report itself cannot prove (real slippage, spread, forward testing) — those are listed as unverified rather than silently counted as risk.