Waka Waka EA vs Kestrel Grid Expert Advisor
Anyone reading a Waka Waka EA review is comparing two grid expert advisors that work the same way, so this page compares the only things that separate them: the drawdown each one publishes, the date of each figure, and whether the account behind it is real.
See pricing and licence levels
Two grids, two records
| Waka Waka | Kestrel | |
|---|---|---|
| Account | Real, track record verified | Simulation plus a demo forward test since September 2026 |
| Deepest drawdown | 66.54% | 14.3% to 33.1% of the recommended capital, simulated, fixed lot |
| Gain | +445.81% absolute | +128% to +429% of the recommended capital, simulated |
| Profit factor | 1.72 | Not meaningful: with no stop loss, no basket closes at a loss and every loss shows up as floating loss instead |
| Trades | 5,043 | 37,271 orders on EURUSD Patient alone (2010–2025) |
| Running since | 2018 | Simulation from 2010; demo from September 2026 |
| Read on | 6 December 2025 | Own runs |
Where Waka Waka is ahead
Seven years of a verified real account is evidence Kestrel does not have and cannot fake. The account survived a 66% fall and kept going, which is the hardest thing to prove about a grid strategy and the thing a backtest can only simulate.
Its profit factor of 1.72 is also a real number from real fills, including the swap and commission that our simulation leaves out entirely.
What the worst moment costs in each
The Waka Waka account showed +445.81% absolute gain on roughly $3,500 deposited, with about $4,352 withdrawn along the way — in money, around $15,600 over seven years, alongside a fall of two thirds of the peak. Percentages on accounts with deposits and withdrawals are not comparable between vendors, which is why the table puts drawdown first.
Kestrel’s worst instant was −€2,788 floating on EURUSD Patient on 21 August 2024 — 32.8% of the €8,500 that portfolio recommends (backtest 2010–2025, simulated, fixed lot). The maximum open exposure at that moment was 5.46 lots, and the separation of the floating figure from the fall from the peak, per portfolio, is on Is Kestrel a Safe Expert Advisor? Drawdown and Worst Float.
A grid can look flawless for years and then need an account three times larger than the one it was sold with, so read both vendors the same way: whether the account is real and verified; the deepest fall with its date; the deposits and withdrawals behind any growth percentage; and the account size the settings assume. Kestrel answers the last one with a table per portfolio and level — the only one of the four a simulation can answer honestly.
What choosing Kestrel looks like
Kestrel is a grid expert advisor for MetaTrader 4 — what that means, in full, is on Kestrel Grid EA for MT4: Expert Advisor With Controlled Lots. Like the kestrel that hangs still in the wind, it holds the exposure inside a measured worst case and closes once.
You choose your pairs — 1 to 4 of EURUSD, GBPUSD, EURCAD and AUDCAD — then Patient, Active or both for each (Patient adds to a basket less often and holds a smaller worst case; Active adds more often, returned more in the backtest and reached a larger worst case), and the level whose recommended capital fits your account: Horizon €999, Summit €4,999 or Zenith €9,999 per year, VAT included. The full field is in Best Forex EA 2026: Expert Advisors Compared by Drawdown.
Frequently asked questions
What drawdown does the Waka Waka account show?
66.54%, on a verified Myfxbook account running on 1:300 leverage, read on 6 December 2025. The same account showed an absolute gain of 445.81%, a profit factor of 1.72 and 5,043 trades since 2018.
Is Kestrel's drawdown comparable to that figure?
Not directly. Kestrel's 14.3% to 33.1% is measured on a simulation over historical data and against the capital each record recommends, while the Waka Waka figure is read from a verified real account. A simulated number and a verified one are different kinds of evidence.
Do both expert advisors use the same kind of grid?
Both manage losing exposure as a basket instead of closing single trades at a stop loss. The published difference is depth: one account fell 66% from its peak, and the deepest Kestrel figure is 31.0% of the capital that portfolio recommends, in simulation.
See pricing and licence levels
Last updated: