How can this system (pipalert) get a 1k perfect C2 Score. The C2 score is just trash, it should be revamped, made more dynamic (like an EMA, give more weight to recent trades) or simply eliminated. Just look at the stats(Drawdown, profit factor, chance of account loss) I’m surprised the system is over 500, let alone a perfect 1K. Piptracker is even worse and it also has a 1K C2 score.
http://collective2.com/cgi-perl/system43770982
http://collective2.com/cgi-perl/system44397706
Unfortunately it seems that C2 score is sort of system vendor specific score, which has it’s value but at least another more system specific score should be available.
Like my test system (awful)
PV Test: [LINKSYSTEM_78062017]
has same score…
For some reason another link missing:
PV Test: [LINKSYSTEM_76879790]
From a previous comment your situation might actually make sense:
"The C2 Score is a awarded on a per-developer basis, not a per system. The purpose was to eliminate the “let’s make one long system, one short system, and promote the one that does well” problem."
So it’s not per system, but you as a developer. if you never had your test system, then your score could probably be higher.
C2 promised to revamp the C2 Score last July, well I’m guessing it hasn’t happened.
“There are indeed problems with the C2 Score algorithm, but perhaps they are not what you think. The main problem is that it gives far too much weight to longevity on the site (i.e. how long you have been using C2). Without revealing any specific private user information, I think it is safe to say that - if you see a score that seems wonderingly high - it is likely because the user has been on C2 for a very long time.
There was a reason for this over-weighting of longevity (I felt that a longer track record was much more valuable than a short one), but I do agree that the way it is currently implemented has many shortcomings.
I have promised a revamp of the C2 Score algorithm before, and I do so now again. I hope to be in a position to tackle it soon.
Matthew”
Both posters above have very valid points.
Here is my 2 cents…
People should not rely an unknown algorithm to help them rate systems, whether that calculation is per system or per developer.
In my opinion, anyone who "needs" a secret algorithm score to make their decision is taking the easy way out. And it is a bad way to do things.
A serious potential subscriber will evaluate performance criteria specific to his/her goals and objectives, and basically develop their own method of sorting through the morass of systems here.
When you hard earned money is on line, it is really important to spend a lot of time evaluating systems on this site.
Kevin
By the way, there is no way I feel I deserve a 999/1000.
Yes, of course. I’m glad C2 let’s you download all the trades of any system on a CSV. When I’m interested on a system, the first thing I do is download all the historical data and dump it on a custom made-spreadsheet which gives me all the stats I need, averages, min, max, PF, how long trades are held, individually and totals, gain per trade, how many winners and losers, in different brackets, how often they reach a bracket and what %of the total. How it compares to the markets. Plus of course my own total score. The best thing is I can change the amount invested and see the new results in a second including total gain, account value, how much invested, etc if I subscribed to the system from the first day. I can also modify several scenarios and apply different commissions to see the results.
Not that I personally use the C2 score, but some potential subscribers might and this is what I don’t like. If it doesn’t work or help, get rid of it.
