Zero spread does not erase a grid's losses
Logan lost 24,334.65 USD after costs in the audited gold run. Its result was already negative before commission and overnight financing, so cheaper trading alone does not explain away the loss.
Read the loss before the fee schedule
| Component | Amount |
|---|---|
| Result before commission and financing | -17,718.67 |
| Commission | -167.54 |
| Overnight financing | -6,448.44 |
| Net result | -24,334.65 |
Spread is already reflected in the trade prices. The first row is therefore not a zero-spread simulation, and these figures cannot establish what changing the account's spread would have earned.
Logan's audit records a loss of 30,247.94 USD on 2016-12-09. It also identifies entries added against an open losing basket and rates structure red. The record shows why a small commission bill is insufficient evidence of manageable losses.
Financing matters without deciding every result
Quantum Queen X version 4.4 paid 349.87 USD in financing and 268.56 USD in commission, yet finished 4,597.04 USD ahead. Financing exceeded commission in both examples, but that ordering did not determine whether they won or lost. Queen X also carries a red structure rating for adding to losing baskets.
These are gold simulations with a base position size of 0.01 lots and 100,000 USD starting capital. Their dollar outcomes do not establish survival on a smaller account or performance with different settings.
When comparing a grid's results, look beyond its advertised spread. Read the financing bill, the worst losses and the open exposure together. A low transaction charge answers a cost question. It does not answer how much an expanding losing basket can take from the account.
The verdict lamps for every grid EA we have measured are public on the category page, the deal level evidence sits in the audits. Your own tester report? The browser check is free.