EA VERDICT · independent audit

OilVector X

XTIUSD · M15 (2017.10.02 - 2026.08.29) · run capital 100,000 · vendor deposit 1,000 · leverage 1:5000 · tested to 2026-08-29 · engine 0.4.2
3 of 6 red
Verdict summary
Data qualityOK
iStructureINFO
CostsRED
ConcentrationRED
!Regime dependenceCAUTION
Prop-firm fitRED
35.23USD
Net profit
1,192
Trades
0.38
EOD Sharpeannualized
Max drawdownend of day
Return, arithmeticon vendor deposit
1.77
Profit factorreport head
The verdict lamps above are public. The written summary, every number and every piece of evidence sit in the full audit. Unlock it below.
What this audit measures. OilVector X, version 1.83, as delivered with EA defaults and fixed lot 0.01. The tester used 100,000 USD run capital and 1:5000 leverage as the measurement frame. Percent return and drawdown are evaluated on the 1,000 USD vendor deposit. The window is M15 (2017.10.02 - 2026.08.29), using 100% real ticks.

Not measured here. live signal performance, individual risk sizing, alternative settings. Declared alternatives can be measured as separate matrix runs.

Sizing invariant Profit concentration, Active trading days, Trade count, Spread sensitivity per trade, Drawdown duration in trading days, Holding times, Win rate.

Sizing dependent CAGR, Drawdown in percent, Absolute PnL.

How this audit was made. One documented protocol for every EA: real tick history, the vendor's own default settings, a fixed cost model. Every deal is rebuilt from the tester report and the balance chain is verified against it. The engine version in the header stamps the exact rule set this page was computed with.
01 Findings

7 findings, 3 of them red.

80% of profit made in 8 daysCosts consume 72% of gross profitConsistency rule breached in 4 years
What exactly tripped the flags above, and how bad is each finding?

The full audit answers this with every finding with severity, mechanism and the exact numbers behind it.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
02 What we measured

Every deal, rebuilt and verified.

1,192 deals rebuilt, and the balance chain closes to the cent
How was every deal rebuilt, and does the balance chain close to the cent?

The full audit answers this with the chain of custody, pairing confidence, balance reconstruction to the cent, real tick coverage and the tester log evidence.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
03 Structure and exits

What the deal list reveals about the machinery.

up to 4 positions open at the same time
Does this EA stack, grid or martingale its way through losses?

The full audit answers this with grid, martingale and hedging forensics measured from the deal list, the sub strategy split and the exit signature.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
04 Underlying vs. strategy

What the market contributed.

the symbol itself moved +66% over the tested span
How much of the profit is just the market going up?

The full audit answers this with the symbol's own move over the traded span against the long and short profit split.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
05 Year by year

Every calendar year on record.

4 of 10 calendar years closed negative
Which calendar years lost money, and how hard?

The full audit answers this with profit, trades and win rate per year, long against short, over the symbol's own move.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
06 Costs and honest metrics

Costs include the commission retrofit.

Open sample. This section is shown in full, exactly as buyers see it. Every other section goes just as deep.

From gross to net

Gross before costs125.64Commission-95.36 (retrofit)Swap+4.95Net profit35.23

Commission retrofitted at 3.5 USD per lot per side on every deal, not tester-native. The balance chain was rebuilt deterministically.

Which Sharpe to trust

Report-head 'Sharpe'2.83EOD Sharpe (annualized)0.38

The report-head "Sharpe" is trade-based and not comparable to an annualized daily Sharpe. The EOD figure is the honest one.

Cost and metric table
Net profit35.23reconstructed
Commission-95.36reconstructed
Commission modelcommission retrofitted at 3.50/lot/side, not tester-native
Swap4.95reconstructed
Gross before costs125.64reconstructed
Cost share of gross72.0%reconstructed
Overnight trades318reconstructed
Tested historyFirst trade 0.0 years after the window opens; the tested history effectively starts 2017-10-05
EOD Sharpe (annualized)0.38reconstructed
Report-head 'Sharpe'2.83exact
CAGR0.0%reconstructed
Max drawdown (EOD)0.0%reconstructed
07 Concentration

How few days carry the result.

80% of the profit came from 8 of 978 active trading days (0.8%). That is 0.3% of the 8.9 year window
How few days carry the whole result?

The full audit answers this with the exact number of days carrying 80 percent of profit, best and worst days with dates.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
08 Drawdown episodes

Where the account sat under water.

28 drawdown episodes, and the longest kept the account under water for 776 trading days
How deep and how long were the worst stretches?

The full audit answers this with every drawdown episode with depth, dates and the trades that dug each hole.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
09 Fresh start survival

What happens to a fresh account, started on any day.

What happens to a fresh account started on the worst possible day?

The full audit answers this with the fresh start survival map, death zones, the computed death chain and the deposit ladder.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
10 Release timeline

How much of the test the vendor could see.

How does the EA do in the only window the vendor could not see?

The full audit answers this with the release timeline, the guaranteed out of sample window and its performance against the rest.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
11 Cost fragility

How quickly extra costs kill the edge.

an extra 0.03 USD per trade erases the entire edge
How much extra cost per trade would kill the edge?

The full audit answers this with the break even cost shock, the cost shock curve and the result without the best trades.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
12 Prop-firm fit

Prop firm rules, replayed day by day.

Replayed with these exact rules. The prop fit verdict above comes from these parameters, applied day by day. The numbers it produced are inside the audit.

RuleIQ Capital Classic (funded)FTMO ChallengeGeneric 6% EOD trailing
Drawdown modeEOD trailingstaticEOD trailing
Drawdown limit6%10%6%
Daily loss limitno such rule5%no such rule
Max position loss0.5%no such ruleno such rule
Consistency rule30%no such ruleno such rule
Overnight positionsallowedallowedallowed
Weekend positionsallowedallowedallowed

IQ Capital Classic (funded): rules as of 2026-08-13, source https://support.iqcapital.io

FTMO Challenge: rules as of 2026-08-13, source https://ftmo.com/en/how-it-works/ + academy/maximum-daily-loss + faq weekend

Generic 6% EOD trailing: rules as of 2026-08-12, source generisch, keine Firmenquelle

0 account deaths at base sizing, and the 30% consistency rule is breached in 4 years
Would this survive a prop firm rulebook, replayed day by day?

The full audit answers this with account deaths per sizing, daily loss and consistency breaches for every rule set.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
13 Monte-Carlo resampling

The same trades, a thousand other orderings.

the 95th percentile resampled path spends 2,051 days under water
How lucky was this exact ordering of trades?

The full audit answers this with the Monte Carlo equity fan, drawdown percentiles, losing streaks, ruin probability and challenge pass rates.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
14 Withdrawal replay

Could you live off it?

15 of 107 months paid anything, and the longest dry streak lasted 38 months
Could you actually live off this, month by month?

The full audit answers this with the withdrawal replay with months paid, dry streaks, the monthly heatmap and the capital what if.

See the exact numbers behind this verdict
15 Glossary

Every term, in plain language.

Glossary
Pairing confidenceHow entry and exit deals were matched into trades. 'Exact' means taken from the tester log, 'validated' means FIFO/LIFO reproduced the report's holding-time figures, and 'heuristic' means an unconfirmed FIFO assumption.
EOD Sharpe (annualized)Sharpe ratio computed from end-of-day balance returns, annualized with the square root of 252. Comparable across systems, unlike the report-head 'Sharpe', which is per-trade.
Cost share of grossCommission plus swap as a share of gross profit before costs. High values mean the edge is eaten by fees and financing.
Max drawdown (EOD)Largest peak-to-trough loss of the end-of-day balance curve.
Floating drawdown (sampled)Largest drawdown of reconstructed equity (balance plus open-position value), sampled at deal timestamps. Between deals equity is unobservable from a report. The tester-head equity DD is tick-based.
MartingalePosition sizing that grows after losses. Looks smooth for months, then loses the account in one streak.
Consistency ruleProp-firm rule capping the best day's share of total profit. It punishes concentrated profit profiles.
Account deathsNumber of times the simulated account breached the profile's drawdown floor over this history (account is then reset and the simulation continues).
Withdrawal %/aYearly withdrawal as percent of account size in the sweep simulation (profits above start are swept daily).
Z-ScoreSerial correlation of the win/loss sequence. Strongly negative values often just reflect several sub-strategies interleaving, not necessarily a defect.
Monte-Carlo resamplingRe-arranging or re-drawing the audited trades many times to see the range of drawdowns and streaks the same trading could have produced. It cannot add information. It reveals path fragility, not future returns.
Block bootstrapBootstrap that draws whole multi-day blocks of the daily PnL series instead of single trades, preserving short-range clustering (losing weeks stay losing weeks).
Ruin probability (floor only)Share of resampled paths that breach the profile's drawdown floor at least once, with profits above start swept. The firm's full rule set is stricter, so this is a lower bound.
Time under waterLongest stretch of trading days a path spends below its previous balance peak.
Withdrawal replayRe-plays the backtest with a monthly payout. On the last trading day of each month, everything above the start balance is withdrawn. Shows what the strategy pays a trader who lives off it, instead of compounding like a backtest.
Dry streakLongest run of consecutive months in which the monthly withdrawal was zero, the months a trader living off the account would have earned nothing.
Lot policyWhether the EA trades fixed lot sizes or scales them with the balance, detected from the variation of lot sizes across the deal list.
Capital what-ifThe observed USD path re-expressed against a different account size (fixed lots). Drawdown percentages and floor-breach risk change with capital even though the trades are identical. Margin limits are not modeled.
Underlying vs. strategyThe symbol's own price move over the traded span, approximated from entry prices. If most profit is long-side while the symbol itself rose strongly, part of the result is the market's tailwind, not the mechanics. The tester cannot separate the two.
Drawdown episodesOne episode runs from a balance peak through its deepest trough until the peak is regained (peak to recovery), on the end-of-day balance curve. The deepest episode is the max drawdown (EOD). The table shows which trades and sub-strategies dug each hole.
Take-home after taxTotal withdrawn multiplied by one minus a user-supplied flat rate. Pure arithmetic on the withdrawal table, no tax law modeled. It stays off unless a rate is provided.
Cost fragilityHow quickly the result dies as per-trade costs rise. The break-even shock is the extra cost per trade (spread, slippage, commission) at which net profit reaches zero. High-frequency systems often die at cents.
Fresh start survivalWith fixed lots the dollar swings that follow any date are identical for every account, so each start date has an exact, measured fate. A fresh account started there dies if the balance path later falls at least one deposit below its starting level. Death-chain runs concatenate into one continuous profit path. Computed from the closed balance curve, where a floating check would only be stricter.
Release timelineThe backtest runs the current EA version over history that mostly predates it. Candles before the release were visible during development, and candles up to the last update were visible to at least one refit. Only the window after the last update is guaranteed out of sample, and it must be judged together with its length.
Provenance labelsWhere a number comes from. 'Exact' is taken as printed from the tester report or journal. 'Reconstructed' is recomputed by the engine from the deal list and journal, deterministic but a model of the run. 'Unavailable' cannot be derived from a report at all and is stated instead of silently approximated.
16 What this audit cannot tell you

The honest boundary.

A good backtest cannot prove an edge. This audit dissects the simulation you gave it. It can expose structural risks (martingale, grids, hidden concentration, cost fragility, rule conflicts), but it cannot tell you that the strategy will make money. Three limits are fundamental.

  • In-sample bias. Commercial EAs are typically released and updated after most of the tested window. A strong report may replay what the vendor optimized against, not what the market will do.
  • Regime dependence. A profitable window can reward almost any mechanic aligned with the prevailing trend. Year slices and long/short splits above hint at this, but cannot settle it.
  • Simulation gap. Even with real ticks and execution delay, the tester does not model live spreads, slippage beyond the next tick, or broker-specific behavior.

This audit is software analysis, not investment advice, and contains no recommendation to buy or trade anything.

17 Get the audit

The evidence is the product.

The evidence is the product. The verdict lamps above are public. The audit contains what proves them: the exact numbers, tables, replays and simulations.

Instant download, self contained interactive HTML. Free updates for the audit you bought. Or take the whole shelf: lifetime access to every published audit for $149.

18 Questions before you buy

Straight answers, measured where possible.

Can OilVector X MT5 pass a prop firm challenge?

We measure it instead of guessing. The audit replays three prop rule sets (IQ Capital, FTMO, a generic 6% trailing profile) day by day over all 1,192 reconstructed trades, then runs the challenge as a Monte Carlo simulation at seven position sizings, with intraday equity resolution. The pass probability curve for OilVector X MT5 is inside the audit.

What monthly withdrawal could OilVector X MT5 sustain?

The audit contains a withdrawal replay. The strategy is re run as if someone lived off it, with monthly payouts, months paid versus dry months and the longest dry streak, plus a safe sizing table answering how small you must trade to keep ruin risk under 10%. The numbers for OilVector X MT5 are inside the audit.

Is OilVector X MT5 a grid or martingale EA?

We classify structure from the deal list, not from the equity curve. Split tickets, adds into adverse moves and size escalation are counted, not guessed. The audit states the classification for OilVector X MT5 with the exact counts behind it.

Does OilVector X MT5 have verified live results?

Vendor live signals and social screenshots are outside our control, so we do not grade them. What we audit is a controlled strategy tester run under one documented protocol, real ticks, vendor defaults, tester log included. That evidence is reproducible and cannot be cherry picked after the fact. The audit shows exactly what that run supports for OilVector X MT5.

What settings were tested for OilVector X MT5?

The vendor's own recommended defaults, unchanged. Deposit, leverage and every input follow the product page or the vendor's published set, and the audit records the full input list from the tester run. Where a preset series exists, each preset is audited separately and the page names the one you are reading.

Is OilVector X MT5 worth buying?

We do not answer that with an opinion. The audit answers it with measurements. The verdict lamps on this page are public, and behind them sit the exact numbers, the cost autopsy, the concentration test, the prop rule replay and the Monte Carlo stress for OilVector X MT5. Read those and the answer becomes yours, not ours.

Is the verdict positive or negative?

That much is public on this page. The verdict lamps above show all six dimensions, and the equity shape since release is open too. What the audit sells is the evidence behind those lamps: the exact numbers, tables, replays and simulations.