I wonder what are the criteria C2 use for highlighting systems making new highs.I found that C2 highlighted systems which make 30 days / 90 days highs and some with less than 1 year of trading record. The system I published with 5 years of track records has been making all time new highs in the past months and some how it did not get highlighted. I think systems making new all time time with multiple years of trading would be a lot more significant than systems making 90 days high with limited track records
I asked C2 support this and they replied their Algo decides which ones are published. One of them is, for example how regular you advertise your strategy on social media!
I think that explains it. I also asked C2 before and their reply was that they used their “proprietary algorithm” which is probably what you described here =)
This is not directly related to your question, but I wonder why you discontinued one of your other systems, “Mean Reversal System”, which shows such a nice performance chart and statistics? Or does it mean that your then existing stock portfolio did so well after you discontinued the system?
The Mean Reversal System is still active for subscription. Did you mean the “ES Daily System Suite” ? I discontinued that system mainly due to the fact that I set an incorrect initial minimum funding on C2. This was an aggressive system which would have required $50K to trade.
When I try to bring up the system page for “Mean Reversal System” there is a highlighted line on top of it saying “This strategy is no longer supported by its creator”.
Thanks for bring this to my attention and sorry for going off on this topic. I just checked again and this system is still available for subscription. As a matter of fact, I just have a new subscriber to the system today. Please make sure you are following the correct link. If this is still an issue, please help by contacting support. Thanks
I am talking about one of your other systems which is called “Mean Reversal Systems” which shows a CAGR of 42.2% since 2012.
I see that now. Sorry for the confusion. The reason I pulled that system was that the C2 margin calculation algorithm was different from what my simulation used and that created a problem for the actual execution of trades on C2. That system is still performing quite well. I might put it back on C2 once I sorted out the ordering and margin calculation issues so that it would reflect actual trades matching with my simulation.
I believe Karl is talking about this (no longer supported) system https://collective2.com/details/76677623
Yes. I just noticed also. And have provided an explanation to him. Thanks
For example system A (less than 3 month old) makes new high every week.
System B (10 year old) just made a new high after 9 years.
Which one do you prefer, assuming both systems have the same return and the same drawdown?
A system with only 3 months of trading records making new high every week could be highly optimized which could collapse within a few months as there is no proven long-term track records to support its robustness. There are many systems with such characteristics on C2. A system with 9 years of track records with a consistent smooth EC would be what I prefer to trade.
With a 42.2% CAGR over almost 5 years (the stats don’t show the dd figures but from the performance chart I figure it was about 22%) “quite well” seems to be quite an understatement.
MeanReversalTradin point is valid. Assuming all the same performance characteristic, you can treat equity peak as outliner and set you focus on moving average of equity curve.
Please keep in mind that I stopped publishing signals on this system since 2013 so there are actually no new trades reflected on C2. I am still trading this system on my own accounts and so far it has been one my best performing systems indeed.
…or simply a highly performing and robust system.
A system making new high after 9 years means that the trader/subscriber was unable to make any dime during all that time.
Performance characteristics are the same. After 9 year total P/L for both system should me similar.
Yes the return and the drawdown are the same for both systems, but who can wait 9 long years just to earn an extra dime.
The ability to quickly recover from any drawdown and to keep making new highs regularly is one of the most important characteristic of a good trading system.
The challenge is, how could you tell if a 3 months old system is a highly performing and robust system if it does not have the actual trading records to support it ?