The opinions expressed in these forums do not represent those of C2, and any discussion of profit/loss is not indicative of future performance or success. There is a substantial risk of loss in trading. You should therefore carefully consider whether such trading is suitable for you in light of your financial condition. You should read, understand, and consider the Risk Disclosure Statement that is provided by your broker before you consider trading. Most people who trade lose money.
Collective2 should also add warnings to strategies that put up track records that have over 500% returns yearly since its very obvious that cannot be achieved with real money on a consistent basis. Otherwise its just allowing subs to chase after fairytale strategies and risk losing all their money.
It should be a message like ‘these aggressive returns are not necessarily replicable in live accounts’…lol
Agreed. A reminder for a reality check would be great. I also really like the idea of having something like max and average percent of account value at risk at any given time. So if strategy has only ever bought stock with 50% of the account value it would show 50%. If it has bought 200% of the account value worth of stock but averages just 100% then it could show both and give the follower an idea of what scaling he can expect to be enough.
If a leader bought futures or forex with a notional value of 5,000% of the account value it would show that too. Obviously this would not take into account stops and how much was actually at risk per trade, but would at least give a quick bird’s eye view of the maximum and average leverage being used by the leader, and I would think it would be failry easy to implement. Even better but perhaps more difficult to implement would be a stress test like David Juday has mentioned similar to Interactive Brokers.
#1 - It’s a valid question. At the end of the day you can’t 100% trust them, since they could just blow up the account overnight and walk away. Now with legitimate strategies here w/ subscribers, the developer may be making a good chunk of $$ every month from C2. They don’t want that to end, so they continue to strive to do a good job and not destroy capital. That is their incentive.
Sometimes good strategies may not be TOS due to the cost. Let’s say you want to run a Forex TOS system for a $10,000 account on here - it costs $99 a month. To run the same system without TOS it will cost you $19-$39 a month. So A) - MONEY.
If you’re already running the strategy in your own account with other strategies running, you may not want to open a new account and go through all that hassle of linking it up. B) - HASSLE.
Also, if you run TOS you get 60% of subscriber fees, vs 50% without TOS, so there isn’t much more incentive there until you get a number of subscribers.
#2 - Depends. If it’s a swing strategy it shouldn’t matter much, like you said. Scalping is notoriously difficult here (I tried) due to C2 making limit orders ‘market’ orders once one order get its limit touched. I wouldn’t trust any scalping system here that isn’t TOS or doesn’t have alot of autotraders making money.
@Snow2020 I agree - the warnings C2 puts on have been a good start. Hopefully that saves at least one subscriber from a terrible experience.
I’m brand new to C2 and have already a paying subscriber to a dozen strategies. I subscribed to Tail before reading this thread. Tail hasn’t made a trade yet on the account since I subscribed, and now I’m scared with some posters saying they could “ruin the account and walk away”. Certainly, if that happened, such an experience would lead me to believe C2 is a scam even if there is a red box on the top right. I can see how C2 doesnt want to be the one deciding which strategy is legit or not, but if this is truly unfeasible then they shouldnt take the leader’s money or let subscribers spend money.
I would rather write off my subscription fee rather than lost my capital. Many people raise the same issue and you also see the warning from C2, what other valid reasons you want to continue this model? My concern is also same with others people in this forum. Good luck.
My guess is this guy will not trade at all now that he has a subscriber. Perhaps that explains the empty month of July. Did he have one back then too? Alot of times these strategies just go dark when they get subscribers, or trade very small amounts of something and have flat returns (UVXY Trader).
According to C2’s founder, if you are the only autotrader you SHOULD be able to get returns just like he has already had. The rest of us disagree with this, as we have yet to see an example of this kind of trading working with real money.
Sorry bud, IMO you are out $150. Lesson learned, there is no free lunch. And no one can trade like he has with real money.
Then again, maybe I’m wrong, and Tail will prove us all wrong and show us how easy trading is. 
Well if he has a subscriber that isn’t autotrading then there are still no real fills and he can continue on until real money actually starts to follow.
Thanks guys. I’ve unsubscribed. I know better than to be in a strategy with so many warning signs, even if it pays off for someone else. Just needed a kick in the a$$ and now I’m going to take a deep dive into all my strategies before trading starts again Tuesday.
Pretty awesome having an active community of people looking out for each other and the overall system.
Wow, a dozen strategies concurrently? Matthew must love you. The highest I’ve ever been is 5 and I think 2 or 3 of them were during free trial periods. I’m down to two paid strategies only now.
I think there was miscommunication here, what he said was that if you are the only autotrader then the reported results on the C2 site will exactly match your results going forward. I don’t think he said your (futures) results will match the past results when there were no real fills.
@AvySyas, if you have any questions regarding strategies you should post them in the forum to ask if anyone has subscribed to the strategy in the past or currently and their feedback and advice before subscribing or putting up real capital at risk.
Some members have done this in the past and avoided being scammed or having lost a lot of capital.
To me it sounded like if only one autotrader was there, they would hit the limit much like he was and get filled at the limit, so he would get the results if the developer traded as he in the past.
Either way I think we can both agree no subscriber is getting anything like the past performance from these systems.
Normal human behavior - blame somebody elsein own mistakes.
C2 provides service to get signals from trade leader and pass it to other persons to auto-trade these signals. The signal provider selection is totally subs responsibility. How C2 can prevent somebody from spending money? How C2 can be blamed for the fact that greedy subscriber chooses system that shows unreal profits, especially if subscriber doesn’t even pay attention to warnings C2 put for the system?
I can confirm from personal experience that if a strategy has a single autotrader that the C2 displayed results match the autotraders actual results. In other words once someone is actually trading a system their real fills are used in place of the simulated C2 fills that we all hate so much.
Definitely agree!
Oh yeah I totally agree with that. I just thought he was implying you wouldn’t see much of a dropoff in performance if there was one autotrader.
Not quite. Legally you are probably right (are you a lawyer?) and I bet that C2 had everything reviewed by lawyers.
But to say that
“c2 score is 90, but it is your responsibility…” or
“cumulative return is X%, but we don’t show you what is autotrade and what is just a guess (our guess)…” or
“this trade leader has 3 winning strategies, but we don’t show you that he went bankrupt 5 times before…” or
“the Monte Carlo bankrupt result is 10% but we don’t explain how we calculate it…”
etc, etc
don’t quite keep C2 off the hook.
My point is: there is a lot of data available on C2. Only a fraction of it is available to us. Filtering is done by C2. Some of the data is analyzed by C2. What data is analyzed is their decision. How it is analyzed and how it is presented to us is also their decision and a large part of this decision (and formulae) is hidden from us. This (to hide) is also their decision.
So to say that they are only a totally objective, un-biased intermediary is quite a stretch (unless you are a lawyer.)
I am not a lawyer, it is just a common sense. If you sit in the taxi with drunk driver, you shouldn’t blame taxi car if you get to the car accident.
As you mentioned, there are a lot of data on C2 and it is quite easy accessible. One who doesn’t like C2 filtered data can always do things by himself. Honestly, I don’t use some ready-to-go staff given by C2, since I think it is done incorrectly or it is useless (such as % returns and drawdowns for future trading, for example).
My point is that C2 should not restrict subscription to any strategy by any criteria. Subscribers just need to beat their greed, adopt reasonable expectations and don’t feed scammers. 
Crazy strategies exist only due to demand for these strategies.
We mostly agree. I just “augmented” (added color to) your reasoning. Nothing is black and white.
And due to the greed of C2.
Or to stay with your analogy:
I still sit into a cab without a breath analyzer because I know that the penalties for DUI, especially for cab drivers are so severe, that I can be reasonably sure (not 100% but maybe 99.9% sure) that my driver is not drunk.
This is not the case on C2. Not only there are no penalties for “drunk driving”, but to erase one’s driving record is made extremely easy. (See above: “greed.”)
Joseph
I think when you compare between Taxi company and C2, the analaogy are very off. When someone apply to become driver at taxi company or Uber or Lyft, all drivers are required to have DL, background Check including driving records and experience (1 day or several years) . If they don’t pass those measurements, those applicants can not work with them. In C2, all people can become trader or signal provider. No need background check, real ID and experience. There is no penalty anything. If the driver involve in accident during DUI, law can punish the driver. At C2, the scam artists can change his profile and create a new model.
The penalties for DUI and DUI laws are set and enforced by third party, not taxi cab or taxi company. There are no third party in the area of signal providers, and C2 is not in a hurry to be this third party. 
And I agree that it would be nice move from C2 to keep all histories and names. But it is their choice to hide them, and I found the way how to deal with this. Maybe not ideal.
Agree, but I’ve compared C2 and taxi car, not a taxi company. There are no “taxi company” in our case. It is a hitchhiking.
