Matthew,
One concern I’ve had is that potential subscribers may not realize this site is showing actual forward looking hypothetical results versus backtested results that one can find anywhere.
Without risking of running afoul of rules, I’d be curious how you can make it more clear that the results are not backtest or point me to places where that is clear.
This is an interesting question.
The heart of the problem is that the current regulations don’t really distinguish between go-forward testing results (which is what we have on C2) and optimized, backtested results (which are completely without value in my opinion). According to the current regulatory and compliance framework, the two are essentially identical – that is, both are hypothetical – and thus require the same very important warnings attached.
It is for this reason that we need to continually remind our customers that all results posted here must be regarded as hypothetical, and that the warnings about hypothetical results must apply to the results you see here.
Itâs as if you must tell people what happens at C2 isnât real so it would follow you must be playing games to trick them. Even as you post real results from real brokerage accounts this is merely hypothetical? Things need to be adjusted for C2âs business model.
I think you have say it is hypothetical because real results are the average of all accounts, and your account may not be the same.
And they are hypothetical because no one out there is going to precisely mimic the system vendor. And even on C2, the vendor may not take all or even any of the trades. Even real brokerage statements are somewhat hypothetical, as you cannot see the thought process/logic in the trader’s mind, just paper. And that does not guarantee that the vendor has accounts at 5 diff brokers, and just would publicize the best performing one. And this problem also follows the C2 vendor with multiple systems or even multiple accounts.
