Let your trading do the talking and stop spamming.
1 Like
I just want to make note to everyone here in this thread and let them know, I have been trading for over 14 years. The no free lunch line someone said earlier couldnât be any more than the truth today. When greed, subscribers, and all this extra stuff gets thrown into a mix, it could otherwise make a great trader turn into a downfall. Thatâs why I keep my trading private. When I did a little system here once on C2, I had positive results (hand traded), no EA bullshit. But, I wanted to make the money myself and I did better when I traded for myself rather than trading for other people. It is a very hard game, and if people really made money on the subscriber side that easily, we all wouldnât have jobs and we can restore the US economy this way. Unfortunately, I have yet to find a real trading âsystemâ that works for people in the long term. Maybe this YM guy is right, but DO YOUR DUE DILLIGENCE or expect DRAW DOWN. DD(Due Dilligence) > DD (Drawdown). Thanks!
Sorry for this. It will be greater chance to find long term system between systems with 10-30% of annual returns rather between systems with 200% return in 3 months.
We will see it in a half of the year. From the super-systems actively advertised on this forum nobody survived for more then 6 month without significant drawdowns.
1 Like
Gentle warning - please stop spamming. If you have a strategy, then run your strategy⌠and let the results speak for themselves.
3 Likes
Will do Sir. My apologies.
Donât blame Mathew for systems failing. Most systems will fail. The trick is to pick systems that are less likely to fail and when they do fail donât hurt you that much. The returns on ConservProfit were insane. Anything that goes up 100% in a couple months can lose just as much twice as fast. Besides, losses donât even look that bad to me yet⌠20% DD? Thatâs nothing from a 100%+ return system. What did you expect?
2 Likes
C2 customers have one syndrome. For them it is acceptable to loss 20% of capital by themselves, but is not acceptable that someone else (author of strategy) do it, regardless of overall strategy performance. And somehow they donât realize that until they are in DD. And instead look carefully in the mirror, we have great topics like this one. As a fact ConserProfits performance is 180% and DD 20%. I remember similar discussion about Event Hunter.
David! Itâs not the point that the systems fail that Iâm making here. It is the traders style and his entry exit picks do not teach anyone good market manners! Thatâs it, period. If people want a free ride, I get it, but a lot of people are shocked and upset and I am answering to why. I know why. Because the system provider is not taking technical approached trades that are sound. I see it, I trade it by hand, I am not on auto signal. I couldnât believe the entries I was making later in the systemâs life.They were stupid. No risk reward principal which EVERY trader should know straight from child birth. Risk 800 pips to make 20? Are you insane.
I have no doubt the trades are absurd. Thatâs why I didnât and wouldnât subscribe. Why are you subscribed?
Because I took the poison, man. lol I fell for it
Show me any system on here doing 200% in a couple months and Iâll show you a system Iâm not subscribing to.
Youâre smarter than I am with discretion. I will give you that
Let this system be a good lesson of how NOT to trade. Point made, thank you
I dunno about smarts, but I can use the grid. C2 has been around for 15 years yet try to find a system with > 60% returns with a long track record.
2 Likes
Forex is tough. No system succeeds in it. Except Zip4x lol how did that do by the way? Not well, hehe
Itâs interesting that people are surprised by a 20% DD on a high return system. That alone would seem to be more or less what would be expected. That is hardly a system collapse.
Perhaps there are 3 reasons that people are extremely worried about ConservProfit:
- Some people may have actually believed that it is possible to get very high returns with tiny (eg, 5%) drawdowns.
- The current DD seems to confirm critics who pointed to his strategy of adding to losing positions to give them a better chance to be profitable, but magnifying losses if they arenât.
- Some subscribers claim to see panic in the developer (and perhaps a resulting unclear change in strategy).
It might be that ConservProfit is an excellent strategy for certain periods, but poor for others. Maybe all he needs a model for deciding which periods are which.
This problem is something like the situation facing most volatility timers in the last few days. Shorting volatility is a great strategy most of the time because usually XIV goes up (and VXX and UVXY go down) even when volatility is flat. Now all you need to know is which periods you are in at which timesâand get cautious when you are in difficult periods. And thatâs not as easy as it appears . . . .
3 Likes
Yeah, nothing here wrong with the trader himself. Seems like a nice, knowledgeable fella, but the issue comes down to consistency as another member laid it out clearly before. If you starting trading multiple systems, different styles, and many markets, that is just a lot for one person to handle hence the âteamâ aspect behind it which Zip4x claimed to have. I donât know Enzo, I donât know if Enzo had a team, but regardless, he was profitable for years until crash. Conserv can be the same way, but I think the system provider is handling too much all at once especially with us all piling on him, he must be an emotional wreck!
1 Like
You know its a bit ironic and comical , here are developers and traders criticize traders that dont use stops and yet criticize subscribers who wants to quit after a DD . After all a system is just like an etf or a stock you should use a stopping point where you should unsubscribe from a system .
Its a bit of a dilemma , you want subscribers to ride a system all the way down but as well advise traders to use stops when they trade the markets .
3 Likes
Exactly. Have it one way or the other, not both!
I agree that it is rational for investors to essentially have a stop-loss to get out of systems. If the system is really sound, of course, that would be a mistake: because a really sound system would recover.
But in the real world, we donât know which systems are really good in the long run. And on C2, it appears that many systems are successful until they arenâtâand often they donât recover. So it often makes sense to cut and run even when the drawdowns are not too bad and not really unexpected.
If the DD (1) is not too serious, and (2) the investor quits, and (3) the system recovers, an investor can always jump back in, if and when the system makes a new high.
