All postsSignals
Night Prowler: the signal that kept dying and coming back
No backtest from me on this one — I never got a copy. What I do have is three years of watching the public signal, two blow-ups, and a deposit that kept getting topped up at remarkably convenient moments.
Trust Index — Claims do not hold up· my call
This tracks whether whoever sells this is being straight with you. It is not a safety rating and not a profit forecast — plenty of honest people sell terrifying software.
Carries 1 risk characteristic that this score ignores on purpose.
Why this number. There is no backtest here, so this is my judgement rather than arithmetic —two documented blow-ups on the vendor's own public signal, a deposit history that has been topped up during drawdowns in a way that flatters the headline return, and no verifiable live account that survived either event. I have run no backtest here, so this is a judgement call — but it is a judgement about events I watched happen and archived at the time.
The findings above still carry dated evidence, listed below. Weights are on the badges page, but they are not what produced this score.
Why there are no numbers here
I never bought this one. I asked, got no reply, and the price went up while I was waiting. So there is no backtest below, no equity curve, no modelling quality — nothing from my tester at all.
What I do have is three years of screenshots of their own public signal, which turns out to be more damning than anything I could have produced myself.
The first death
March 2024. The signal had been running about fourteen months, showing the kind of steady upward line that sells a lot of licences. Over four days in the middle of the month it went from $18,400 to $611.
That is not a drawdown. That is the account ending.
The part that annoys me
The signal did not close. It got topped up.
Three separate deposits land in that account during drawdown periods, each one restoring the balance to roughly where it needed to be for the percentage return to still look respectable. If you only ever look at the headline number — which is what the sales page shows you — you would never know either blow-up happened.
This is why I do not trust percentage returns on signal accounts, ever. A percentage is a ratio, and you can fix a ratio by quietly changing the bottom half of it.
The second death
November 2025. Same pattern, faster. Then the signal was reset, and the history from before the reset stopped being publicly reachable.
I archived it before that happened, which is the only reason this post exists.
So what is this worth
I have not tested it, and I will not pretend otherwise. But I do not need a tester to tell you that something which has gone to zero twice on its own developer’s public account is not a thing you should attach your savings to.
If they ever send me a copy I will run it properly and publish whatever comes out, good or bad. Until then this is what I saw, with dates on it.
The receipts
Every finding above, with the thing that proves it and the date I grabbed it.
- 01
Public MQL5 signal went to near-zero twice — March 2024 and November 2025. Both drops archived at the time, both followed by the signal being reset rather than closed.
ScreenshotCaptured 20 Nov 2025Blown up repeatedly
- 02
Account history shows three deposits landing during drawdown periods, each one restoring the balance enough to keep the percentage return looking healthy. Dates line up with the two large losses.
Archived pageCaptured 20 Nov 2025Deposit topped up
- 03
After the November 2025 reset there is no verified account covering the period before it. The pre-reset history is no longer publicly reachable.
Archived pageCaptured 14 Aug 2026No verified live account
- 04
Trade history on the public signal shows lot sizes escalating after losing trades — 0.02 to 0.04 to 0.09 — before the March 2024 drop.
ScreenshotCaptured 20 Nov 2025Martingale