Verification Length

Verification length is the single most-important quality dimension in EA evaluation because it is the one quality dimension vendors cannot manipulate. Marketing copy can be rewritten, screenshots can be selectively chosen, backtests can be re-run with adjusted parameters — but the calendar duration of a publicly-verified live account is what it is, and time only flows in one direction.

The editorial bar evolution from 2024 to 2026:

• **2024 baseline**: 6 months of public account was the buyer expectation; vendors with 12+ months were premium • **2026 baseline**: 12 months is the buyer expectation for serious products; vendors with 24+ months are premium; 6 months is the absolute floor for any inclusion

Why length matters more than headline numbers:

• **Regime coverage**: a 14-month verification covers at least one major regime stress event (CPI cluster, central-bank meeting cycle, equity correction). A 4-month verification might be entirely during favourable conditions; the buyer doesn't know how the EA behaves outside that window • **Drawdown distribution**: drawdown is path-dependent; short verification windows may not have observed the deepest drawdowns the strategy is capable of producing. 12+ months produces drawdown distributions that approximate the true risk profile; 4-month windows systematically understate worst-case observations • **Vendor accountability**: a vendor maintaining 12+ months of continuous verification signals operational discipline; vendors with broken or short records signal either inattention or hiding • **Strategy decay detection**: ML-based and supervised systems can decay over months as market microstructure evolves; 12+ months of verification covers at least one model-decay cycle, providing evidence of whether the vendor's update cadence maintains edge or fails to do so

How to evaluate verification length:

• **Continuous?** No gaps in the public account history; an account that was disabled for months and reactivated has weaker continuity than one continuously linked throughout • **Stable broker?** The verified period should use the same broker throughout, or the vendor should explicitly document broker migration with parameter adjustments. Mid-track broker changes invalidate cross-period comparability • **Stable EA version?** The verified period should reflect the current EA version, or the vendor should document version changes and their performance impact. Mixed-version histories overstate verification value • **Same risk-per-trade?** Position-sizing changes mid-verification reduce comparability; the verified record should reflect consistent risk parameters

For EA buyers, the simple workflow: navigate to the vendor's verification link, check the account start date, compute how many months have passed since then. If less than 6 months: too new for serious consideration regardless of headline performance. If 6-12 months: acceptable for entry-tier evaluation with documented vendor accountability. If 12+ months: meets the standard for any tier consideration. If 24+ months: meets premium-tier criteria.