Buying inverse volatility is the same* as shorting volatility. I would be happy to explore this in an appropriate thread.
*but with slightly more contained risk…
Yes, yes, thanks @TinyMammal, I do know this but didn’t communicate that well in my post… I was personally short vol in the form of XIV during much of January but followed my signals and went to cash on Friday Feb 2 and went long vol (VXX) on Monday Feb 5. It’s been pretty choppy seas since then in the volatility markets. My point was simply that not all volatility strategies are the same, and some clear market signals said GET OUT of short vol before the Feb 5 volpocalypse. I just took exception to your blanket “terrible” for being short vol.
1 Like
Don’t know if you’re directing reply to me or not, but have no failures with C2. Investor is 100% responsible for their decisions. Trade Leaders are 100% responsible for their decisions in that their record while taking subscription money stays with them. C2 is 100% responsible for being an honest broker and not hiding data to favor one party or the other. Apparently you feel that trade leaders should hide all their past failures and put all the blame on the investor. It simply boils down that if a trade leader receives subscriber money (which by definition means Public) and folds for whatever reason, their past Public record while taking funds should be clear and easy to check going forward for ALL public systems. Amazing that anyone has a problem with that, except the scammers.
3 Likes
Seriously, I think that active risk monitoring is much more worth than any developer history (I do agree with NFA statement). If a subscriber sees that developer did overleveraged strategy, a developer with strategy can be dumped before bad things will happen.
My comments were not directed at you. Besides respecting different opinions, I have nothing more to say.
2 Likes
I’m not sure why you keep quoting the NFA statement that has no bearing here - we are talking about human behavior here, the NFA statement is talking about market performance.
Knowing the past behavior of a trade leader provides a potential subscriber additional useful information in making a decision to subscribe or not. Yes, you can also wait longer before subscribing to watch their performance but I don’t understand why you are arguing against having more information, e.g. their past trading record.
Why should a trade leader not be tied to their past actions? C2 already gives them the option of complete anonymity since they do not have to use their real names here.
Honestly I don’t understand the logic that if trade leaders can’t hide their past failures they may not even create a system on C2 in the first place. If they are offering a system to the public and want subscribers then they should stand behind it no matter what happens.
My biggest fear with autotrading is someone who goes off the rails and doesn’t follow their stated trading rules. If someone has done in the past with a system that has subscribers I absolutely do not want to subscribe to them ever - I’m not interested in giving them second chances with my money.
3 Likes
I would change that to, “that strategy looks like a good example of why shorting volatility WITHOUT APPROPRIATE PROTECTION is always a terrible idea.” 
2 Likes
I created a thread (Volatility Trading - Short Side - Bad Idea?) to discuss volatility and whether shorting it is a terrible terrible idea (for most people / strategies).
so back to a different off tangent topic we had instead of shorting vix is a good idea or not.
If a strategy goes public and gets subscribers. why and how is fair for the developer go into hiding during bad times and when it gets better hes back to public ? @MatthewKlein is it possible to have a # limit on how often a strategy can go private. Shouldnt a strategy going PUBLIC and ready to accept subscribe to make $ it means that “testing” so you call it is over ? A strategy shouldn’t be allow to go public and private non stop.
1 Like
It’s real simple, if someone does not like going public and private non stop, they don’t subscribe, if they don’t care about going from public to private non stop then they can subscribe if they like, it’s called freedom and freedom is everything. Without freedom Collective2 would not exist.
1 Like
Should still have rules or limitation. Scammer is everywhere on twitter, alert service, trade services. C2 transparency is important to avoid that. a strategy is like a business, if is ready to open for customer you can’t just close chop when ever you want. Have some accountability.
4 Likes
A business can close shop for holidays or for the weekend or for a death in the family or for any other reason they choose, that’s because it is their business and it is nobody else’s business, a business is free to close and reopen any time they choose. But if they wish to succeed, they must make enough right decisions.
2 Likes
Really simple. A trade leader can simply stop trading temporarily for all these reasons without having to go private. They can inform their subscribers and for that matter C2, who could mark the equity curve in a different color during the time trading was temporarily suspended. This also serves the legitimate traders better.
2 Likes
Who determines who the “legitimate traders” are, answer, “subscribers”.
Perhaps there are some traders here that need to take responsibility for their lack of enough subscribers instead of blaming what they perceive of as scammers.
2 Likes
look like Dr Martin Gale strikes back. new ATH for Bijagual?
1 Like
Looks like Bijagual is currently under a huge 20+% drawdown which means 100k+ for those subs that subscribed at 100% scaling.
Trading 100-400 lots per trade for that account size is asking to be blown up.
@MatthewKlein, I think there should be a community warning about this strategy mentioning the risks associated with this strategy.
what logic is this ? not if you keep buying lower. with 33:1 leverage its like an endless check book. (even for fake money)
Unfortunately there are subs that feeling the pain right now.
It turned to shit the moment there were real fills…
Do you think that’s what the situation is? That the previous performance wasn’t based on actually trades?
@TinyMammal, I’m actually not sure but these types of forex strategies where trades are held until they become profitable again by adding size is a sure way to blow up.
There are probably no stops used even and they are carried overnite for days and weeks from the looks of it.
