E minis

Hi Matthew, I mainly trade E-Minis ( S&P 500, Nasdaq, 5$ Dow) Could you please suggest a day trading system (rapid) with a free trial period ??

Thanks Mau


You are in for a rough ride.

Although I will stop short of recommending for/against any specific systems, let me share a few things that those of us here who have been subscribers of rapid day-trading systems here on C2 has found out - usually at considerable expense:

1) fast systems that use limit orders have serious problems with C2/TB autotrade implimentation. I won’t say “it can’t be done”, but I will say “I and others have lost a ton of money trying”. Randy? Michael? Peter? Having said that, the process has improved and I hope it will keep improving, but I have YET to see any unqualified success stories.

2) be very careful to subscribe only to systems with a statistically significant track record. 10 trades doesnt mean anything.

3) look at the forums and search for all comments and feedback about systems/vendors, not just the feedback left at that system page.

4) You MIGHT want to insist only on systems who state that they use 100% mechanical and auto-executed entries/exits/stops, including EOD exits. In my experience, many of the more horrible drawdowns have come when system vendors decided to use judgment and discretion and ignored their own (sometimes even stated) rules in their description - its terrible that CAN occur, but it can and does. My only suggestion as a “best protection” idea is to use systems whose executions are automated by software (TS or similar) and therefore, you KNOW they will exit/enter when their rules say they will.

5)if you plan to autotrade with TB, then when you DO subscribe, be sure to use very minimal scaling for a while until you see how they system performs and the orders are filled vs what C2 reports - then you can see if the historical C2 record is likely to be an accurate reflection of reality. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isnt. Until you try it for yourself, there is no way to tell.

Thats the basics - several others here can weigh in, we have all been fighting the fight together!


You don’t really see many posts by subscribers here, and it makes me wonder just how many subscribers there really are to these systems. Some here, myself included, have endured really bad losses with systems that show up as the best systems on C2. The primary reason for this is the limit order systems that C2 shows as being filled, when invariably the subscriber gets filled at a much worse price either way. My personal opinion is that C2 should not show a fill unless the market moves one tick past the price. I recommend you stay away from systems that trade many times each day. You’ll have more slippage and commission costs. If you do try any system, start very small, and add to it if the system is making you a profit. Be wary of the boastful claims of some of the system vendors. I won’t name names here, but you can read back through the posts here, and you’ll find at least two systems here that once were highly touted that are now in tatters, leaving some of the subscribers very pissed and much poorer. Currently, I can vouch for the fact that The Black Dog’s posted record is 100% accurate, and that I have gotten even better fills than is shown. They have been VERY profitable, and I can’t say that for a lot of the systems I’ve tried here. The only klnock on them is overnight holding and being long overnight if some disaster strikes. But, on the other hand, they could also be short overnight when something bad happens. I hope this helps. There’s no panacea, no magic system that’ll make you rich in a few months to be found here. As I don’t see subscribers posting much, I wonder if most of the “subscribers” are also system developers trying out each others systems? (just kidding)


How would you handle the following scenario:

>> System says: “Buy ES Limit 1001.25”

>> People autotrade system.

>> The market touches 1001.25 briefly.

>> One autotrader gets filled, but another doesn’t.

According to your recommendation, C2 should not count this order as filled – even though someone, somewhere got filled at that price, and (in fact) it was a Collective2 customer.

Now you would have a case where a C2 AutoTrader got filled on a signal, but according to you, C2 couln’t recognize the fill as taking place. So system vendors wouldn’t be allowed to enter instructions about how to exit the order.

See the problem? People tend to think C2 is “generous” with fills because we are in cahoots with system vendors and want to show systems in the best, most flattering light possible. Not at all the case, I assure you!

This problem exists with all systems that use limit orders. (And it is not a problem solely on C2. If you do backtesting and optimization using TradeStation, and your system uses limit orders, TradeStation will treat your hypothetical trades as filled, even though in real life you might not have been filled.)

So it’s a little unfair to blame C2 for this. We work incessantly, and damn hard, to provide savvy investors with tools that they can use to analyze systems. But the main thing an investor can ask when looking at a system is: “Doe the system use limit orders? Does it try to scalp a few points on each limit trade?” If the answer is yes, the results displayed in the Best-Case chart will not be achieved in real life.

I will be revamping the Realism Factor algorithm to give this more emphasis. I just wanted to pipe up in the meantime, to say that, while I can understand why you are frustrated, this frustration is caused by trading methodologies, and not necessarily by C2.

I’ve promised this before, and my promise stands: In the next few weeks I will be introducing new ways to find and analyze systems, which may give greater emphasis and visibility to systems that have results which are achievable in real-life trading. Hang in there.


I wonder if most of the “subscribers” are also system developers trying out each others systems? (just kidding)

Michael, thanks for all the suggestions. I trade futures since long time ago (8 years) and I have my own system based on candlestick interpretation on multiple time frames + comfirmation. You enter at the market and the exit is made on the lowest average of points made in the previous 4 days for that kind of trade.

As all of you I went through the famous 3 steps: loosing money, breaking even, making money. My desire is to authomatize my system ( no working overnite) to cancel all the emotional mouse part.

take care Mau

thank you Walter


I see the dilemna, and I wasn’t implying that C2 was in cahoots with any of the vendors. I know you work very hard to make C2 work.

This problem exists with all systems that use limit orders.

There might be a simple solution to this problem: why not ban limit orders as many have requested and replace it with MIT (Market If Touched) orders on the 1-minute average volume weighted bar.

As others have said, the “market” price is the “practical and true” price of the market at any given time (that is why it is called the “market” price because the “free” market is synonymous with “practical and true”) and the goal of C2 should be to represent the practial and true picture of a system, not an utopian picture (as evidenced by the need for a Realism Factor) leading to fallacies and prejudices on which no concepts can be based on; not for long without invalidating it.

Buy limit orders usually results in missed orders. Sell limit orders are completely ridiculous. When one wants out of a position, exit at the market; a valid case to ban limit orders, even voluntarily.

Would it be a great feat indeed if one manages to produce excellent results in a short-term or med-term system using only market orders?; it could be achievable if one trades highly liquid, trending markets. See for instance Midas Med-Term (Prudent) method.

>(And it is not a problem solely on C2. If you do backtesting and optimization using TradeStation, and your system uses limit orders, TradeStation will treat your hypothetical trades as filled, even though in real life you might not have been filled.)

I just want to point out that you are comparing apples to oranges. C2’s “walk-forward” testing is an entirely different concept than “back-testing” using a back-testing software like TradeStation, the essential difference being C2’s testing is conducted “real-time”.

ps: It is my opinion that the concept of a “free” market applies only to a market where the man’s rights are respected; where no particular group gains a distinct advantage, because there are no “group” rights; there are only “individual” rights, the rights of man qua man.

MK, if this post causes you a hard time, please delete it; I really dont care. After all, you are the moderator of this board; it is within your rights to do so.