1) The Ozymandias indicator does an excellent job of adjusting to the story, but it shows a poor result on forward tests.
2) The improved ‘Ozymandias' shows outstanding results in all key indicators, but its mediocre results in forward tests clearly hint at overfitting. Probably, a large number of parameters of the new indicator led to a re-optimization effect. Most likely, to select parameters, you need to use longer and more diverse history intervals, use a shorter timeframe, or optimize for several symbols at once.
3) In comparison with the tests using the RBTI v1.0 method, the RBTI v2.0 method showed a much worse result. This is mainly due to the increased influence of forward tests on the final rating values. As a result, a powerful modern indicator lost even to the classic moving average with a result of 1.45 versus 2.08. But we must draw conclusions: a lot of parameters is not always good, and high—quality adjustment to the optimization area does not guarantee normal operation on new data.
4) The Ozymandias indicator has been assigned an RBTI rating of 1.45.
5) The OzymandiasUMA indicator has been assigned an RBTI rating of 2.5. The result will be recorded in the leaderboard.