You Can't Spot a Bad EA Developer by Looking at Their Website

A trader sent us a screenshot yesterday. He'd spent $4,500 on a custom EA from a developer with a polished portfolio, glowing testimonials, and a 4.8-star rating on their platform. The EA ran for three weeks, then returned -$7,200 in live trading. The developer ghosted. No response to emails. No revision offer. No accountability.

This happens to 1 in 8 traders who outsource EA development. Not because the trader was stupid. Because they hired the wrong developer—and didn't know what to look for until the money was already gone.

Here's the thing: every bad EA developer has a polished sales page and a few fabricated testimonials. They look professional from the outside. The red flags aren't on their website—they're hidden in what they DON'T show you, what they DON'T say, and the questions they DON'T answer.

By the end of this article, you'll know exactly what to ask, what to avoid, and why most traders make the same expensive mistakes.

Red Flag #1: They Charge Hourly Instead of per Project

An hourly rate is a developer's way of saying: "I don't have skin in the game."

When a developer charges $50/hour to build your EA, they profit from inefficiency. A simple strategy that should take 3 hours becomes 30 hours. A bug that takes 1 hour to fix becomes a 5-hour diagnosis. Their incentive is to stretch the work, not solve your problem.

Professional EA developers charge per project because they're confident in the scope. $200 for a simple strategy. $800 for a complex one with multiple indicators. $2,000+ for AI-based systems. The price is fixed. The scope is defined. You know what you're getting and what it costs.

When someone says hourly, ask why. If they can't estimate the scope of a basic EA build in 2026, they don't know their craft. That's a red flag. If they say "scope creep happens," they're telling you they haven't built enough EAs to predict what creep looks like.

Pro developers build so many EAs that scope is predictable. They've seen every variation of RSI strategies, Bollinger Band setups, and price action patterns. They know what takes 4 hours and what takes 40.

Red Flag #2: Zero Backtest Results or Past Work Samples

Here's the question every EA developer should answer in their first response: "Can you show me a backtest of a strategy similar to mine?"

If they hesitate, dodge, or say "every strategy is confidential," that's a red flag. Not because strategies need to be secret—they don't. But because a professional developer has a portfolio of work that proves they deliver results.

A real backtest shows: win rate and profit factor, drawdown during the backtest period, the timeframe and instruments tested, date range of the backtest, and number of trades executed (50+ is statistically meaningful). On the MQL5 marketplace, you can see exactly how this works—every listed EA includes performance stats and real user reviews.

If a developer won't show backtests, they either haven't built EAs before or their backtests suck. Either way, you're the experiment.

Alorny includes a full backtest report with every EA because we want you to see exactly how it performs before you deploy it live. No surprises. No excuses.

Red Flag #3: They Promise Guaranteed Returns or Win Rates

This one eliminates 40% of fake EA developers immediately.

"This EA has a 72% win rate" is a lie. "This EA returns 15% monthly guaranteed" is fraud. Not incompetence—fraud.

Here's why: market conditions change. What wins 70% of the time in 2024 might win 45% in 2026 if volatility shifts or central banks change interest rates. An EA that crushes in ranging markets dies in trending markets. An EA that thrives on EURUSD might fail on GBPUSD.

Any developer who guarantees returns is either: (A) lying about their own results, (B) planning to take your money and disappear, or (C) doesn't understand markets well enough to speak accurately.

Good developers say: "Here's what this strategy returned in backtests under these conditions. In live trading, results vary based on slippage, spread, and market conditions. Here's the risk you're taking." That's honesty. That's professionalism.

Red Flag #4: The EA is a Black-Box Template, Not Custom Code

You describe your strategy. A week later, the developer sends you an EA. You test it and it works. Three months later, you're down $6,200 because the EA wasn't built for YOUR strategy—it was a template they sell to 40 other traders.

This happens when developers: (1) sell the same base EA to multiple clients with different indicators swapped in, (2) use off-the-shelf templates from marketplace sites, (3) don't spend time understanding your specific entry/exit logic, (4) never ask clarifying questions about timeframe, risk tolerance, or market conditions.

A custom EA is built from scratch for your exact strategy. Not a template with your parameters plugged in. Not a black box where you can't see the code. Not a "one-size-fits-all" system.

Before hiring, ask: "Will you build this from the ground up, or modify an existing template?" If they dodge or say "it's based on a proven foundation," that's template talk. You want custom.

The difference in performance is massive. Templates overfit to historical data because they're built to work for anyone. Custom EAs are built to work for you, your risk tolerance, and your specific market conditions.

Red Flag #5: They Have No Support or Revision Policy

You get the EA. You deploy it. On day four, you notice it's placing trades at the wrong price or missing signals. You email the developer. Three weeks later, still nothing.

This is the most expensive red flag because it shows up AFTER you've paid.

A real developer includes support. Not "email us maybe," but actual revision cycles. 7 days of free fixes. 30 days of tuning. A policy that says: "If it doesn't work as specified, we fix it."

If a developer says "all sales final" or "additional changes are $XXX," they're building in a way that allows them to deliver mediocre work and get paid anyway. That's malice dressed up as policy.

Good developers like Alorny include 30 days of free revisions because we're confident the EA will work. If it doesn't, we fix it. No questions. No upsell.

Red Flag #6: They Don't Test on Multiple Timeframes or Market Conditions

A developer tells you: "I backtested your EA on the daily chart for the last 12 months. 68% win rate. Ready to go live."

What they didn't test: What happens on a 4-hour chart? What happens when the Fed raises rates and volatility spikes? What happens during the Asian session vs. European session? What happens in the last 3 months (which are completely different market conditions than the first 12)?

An EA that works on one timeframe can catastrophically fail on another. An EA built during a bull market can wipe accounts when sentiment shifts.

Professional developers test on: multiple timeframes (15m, 1h, 4h, daily, weekly), different market regimes (trending, ranging, volatile, calm), multiple currency pairs or instruments if applicable, recent market data AND historical data, out-of-sample testing (test on recent data the EA wasn't trained on).

If they tested in only one way and delivered it as "done," that's a red flag. You're about to find out the hard way what they didn't test for.

Red Flag #7: They Can't Explain the Strategy in Plain English

Ask your EA developer: "Walk me through the entry logic. When exactly does the EA buy? What are the three conditions that must be true?"

If they stammer, say "it's proprietary," or spout technical jargon without answering the question, that's a red flag.

Here's why: if they can't explain it simply, they don't understand it. And if they don't understand YOUR strategy, how are they supposed to code it right?

A good developer can say: "You want to buy when the 20-MA crosses above the 50-MA AND the RSI is below 50. That's two conditions. You want to sell when RSI goes above 70 OR when you hit your stop loss. We code that in about 15 lines."

That's clarity. That's confidence. That's someone who's coded 500+ EAs and can instantly see the logic.

If they get defensive about explaining their work, they're either protecting something (like a template they're disguising as custom) or they genuinely don't understand what they're building.

Red Flag #8: They Support Platforms They Don't Actually Specialize In

A developer says: "I'll build your EA for MT4, MT5, NinjaTrader, and TradingView."

If they claim to support five platforms equally, they probably specialize in none. Deep expertise in MT5 is different from "we can do MT5." A real specialist knows: the exact syntax differences between MT4 and MT5, why certain strategies work on one platform but not another, how to optimize code specifically for MT5's architecture, the limits and quirks of each platform.

When someone claims to support everything, they usually do nothing well. Pick a developer who specializes in MT5 if that's what you need. Specialists deliver better code because they know the platform inside and out.

Red Flag #9: Pressure to Decide "Today" or "This Week"

"I have limited spots available. If you want me to start on your EA, you need to commit by Friday."

This is the oldest closing technique in sales. Create false scarcity. Force a decision before the prospect thinks it through.

Real developers have backlogs. They're booked out. You wait for them, not the other way around.

If someone is pressuring you to decide, they're either: (A) desperate for cash and will rush your project, or (B) trying a pressure tactic because they know their pitch isn't strong enough to hold up under scrutiny.

Good developers let you think about it. They answer your questions. They send you examples. They never rush you into a decision because they know that buyers who feel pressured become buyers who refund or leave bad reviews.

Red Flag #10: They Won't Provide a Written Specification or Contract

A developer says: "Yeah, I'll build it. What's your strategy?" and then starts coding with no written spec.

Two weeks later, you get something. It's not what you described. You want revisions. They say you changed the spec.

This is chaos. Avoid it.

A professional sends a spec: "We will build an EA that enters a long position when [Condition A] and [Condition B]. We will exit at [Stop Loss]. We will place this on [Instruments] using [Timeframe]. We will include the following risk management: [Details]. Delivery is [Date]. Price is [Amount]."

Get it in writing. Not verbal. Not vague. Written. According to trading risk management best practices, clear specifications protect both parties from misalignment.

When deliverables are written, disputes disappear. You both agreed on paper. If something doesn't match, it's clear who broke the agreement.

What Good EA Developers Actually Look Like

They: charge per project, not hourly. Show past work samples and real backtests. Never guarantee returns, only show historical performance. Build from scratch, not templates. Include revision support as standard. Test extensively on multiple timeframes and conditions. Explain their code in plain English. Specialize deeply in one or two platforms. Never pressure you to decide. Provide written specifications before coding. Include a full backtest report before delivery.

That's what Alorny does. Every EA. Every time.

Key Takeaways

The most expensive mistake a trader makes isn't overpaying for an EA. It's underpaying a bad developer and losing weeks or months troubleshooting broken code. Hire right the first time. Ask these ten questions. Avoid these ten red flags. The difference is the difference between an EA that makes you money and one that burns your account.