Developer's System's Order Fills Based on Your Real-Life Auto Trader's Fill: FAIR or UNFAIR?

I would like to hear from the community of both system developers and auto-trade subscribers’ on this, please (thank you). I just started a fairly new system and lucky enough I got my first subscriber who has some confidence in my abilities. Anyway, I have made three consecutive trades where each time my “quick trigger” trade is executed my subscriber’s auto-trade is also executed but every time at a worst price than my own “filled” price.

C2 has done this three straight times now to me ( adjusting and giving me a worse price than my own fill prices in order to reflect my auto-trader’s actual real-life filled price in his brokerage account). I prefer to use limit orders (instead of market ones) and each time C2 is saying my orders is not “market clearing” and thus I am getting the same price that my real-life auto-trade subscriber got on his real-life brokerage account. Since my system’s results are already “hypothetical”, what is the rational in my orders being adjusted when if it is different than that of my subscriber who auto-trades. Not one, but three consecutive orders (both entry and exit) of getting worse fills than executed to reflect “badly” on my system’s performance is hard to swallow. There are obviously folks here with a lot more system developer trading experience here on C2 than me, so I would love to hear your thoughts. Any and all opinions are welcomed. Thank you.

FAIR (auto-trader). Real prices are better than simulated “demo” prices. Especially on the systems that trade using limit orders or trade non-liquid instruments. As I know C2 uses average prices if you have number of subscribers. I would even use worse then average prices taken from the prices range for particular trade.

Trading the ES mini futures (as my system does) is as a liquid as they come, so not really applicable in my case.

Why does subscriber have worse fills?

Maybe, you should be asking C2 that. I don’t mind too much on my EXIT trade, but it makes no sense to me on the trade ENTRY, especially when I experience a DD (beyond my fill price), and yet C2 is saying my executed price only “got touched” and never broke thru the market price.

Example, today I get an ENTRY fill on ES at 2181 to SELL, which then almost immediately goes as high as 2185.50 against me, yet somehow my fill SELL price of 2181 was “never broke thru” upwards (i.e. above 2181), so C2 replaces my sell order from 2181 to that of 2180.75. Price goes above 2181 almost immediately yet it never “broke thru it” (upwards). I guess that makes sense to you, but not me.

Fair - developer …

Fair - subscriber…

This reflects what other subscribers are likely to experience thus it is the “real” system performance.


The problem rises because there is a delay between your execution and subscribers’ execution.
From your point, it is unfair, because it twist your performance.
From subscribers’ point, it is fair because that is real statistics they can get when they evaluate your strategy, how much they can profit from your strategy, thus to make decision if they want to subscribe.
So if it is fair to you, it will be unfair to subscribers.
So if you want to make money from subscribers, you have to treat them fair, or you will be lying to them.


Your point is well taken and much appreciated. Thank you for the feedback.