Has anyone here subscribed to the “Just Forex Trades” strategy? I’m considering investing some capital but would like to hear from some other subscribers if they had any success with this strategy first.
Just my opinion, I’m not a subscriber, but if you click “Show AutoTrade data” and look at his trade details you can see he’s adding to losing positions (martingale-like action). His unrealisticaly high %win also suggests martingale. So personally I would not be interested. Others might have a different view.
1 Like
Hi Daniel, even though you are interested with his strategy, I suggest you wait after sept 1 because IB has a new regulation that only qualified customer can use forex in IB. Qualify customer means a person / organization that has net worth over US $10 M. Let see how C2 can solve this matter, other wise, you can consider a different strategy that not related with forex.
Daniel, I am not a subscriber either, but for whatever it is worth here is my opinion: I think the most important question any potential subscriber to a system want to ask is: “how much risk am I willing to take just to make $1?” (see screen shot below). I see this system as a typical “stay in and win as much as possible just to get a high percentage rate as possible at all cost” strategy. When not using your own real money, a strategy using Forex works perfectly for this because no one currency is ever going to continue to beat another currency forever without an eventual turnaround (from the losing currency), so as long as a system developer “doubles down” (i.e. adding to a losing position) until such an expected turnaround happens then the system will almost always end up in the “green” with a very high percentage “winning” rate. Just Forex Trade is a miniature version of Zip4x.
You can see in the above example (one of numerous others) that the developer continues to double down on and then as soon as the trade turned “green” from being down almost $2000 he cashes out at $59–just to have a “winning” trade. This is obviously easy to do with “virtual money”, but with your own money you have to ask yourself if you are willing to make $1 for about every $30 you are willing to lose/risk ( approximately $1800/59 or so)…obviously, without first running out of money/options to do so of course?
1 Like
Disagree , this strategy wont work even in a demo account , at some point the market doesnt reverse enough and thats applicable to currencies as well , take a look at FX long term charts …
You have the right to disagree, but if you have enough capital (in a virtual account) to keep adding to your original trade (at a lower cost each time) and/or the patience and time to wait, the currency pairs of these major economies/countries will eventually turn around and switch places in terms of the trend. Again, case in point is zip4x. Account was one time down 100x of its eventual closing take/profit. That is virtually impossible with a stock without the the company at hand going bankrupt and a definite no-no with options (like the recent case of “Karen the Super Trader”). Fact is that this “scheme” works best on Forex because again no major currency/economy is going to go bankrupt any time soon, so time is the only unknown in such a equation or scenario.
If you have unlimited virtual capital sure a martingale strategy will work in any market for example indices and commodities , surely commodities wont go to zero any time soon either .
Zip4x is still new - just 3 years - but at some point the drawdown will reach 100% - currently 85% - . Currencies do trend for decades and if you look at long term charts this strategy doesn’t work in currencies . Infact it may work better if you just buy etfs - spy - in a tiny size with no leverage . Bottom line it is not a feasible strategy .
Also if you lookat zip4x and ither double down forex strategy on c2. They can survive 50-102% draw down only on c2. C2 doesnt give you margin call when you are down 50%. It lets you hold the position until it back in green. Thats just my observation.
I always wonder how can zip4x keep surviving 100%+ drawn down every 6 months…
1 Like
Zip4x IMO has already blown up several times but was not caught by C2 for one reason or another. One trade went to a 200% drawdown to equity as I recall. 200%!
David and Osutai, that is exactly my point. C2 allows these types of Forex systems to “thrive” because they are not rooted in reality like margin calls associated with real money account. Despite zip4x’s over 100% DD at a couple of times it is still here rated as one of the “leading strategies,” charging a few new unsuspected folks maybe new to C2 $600/month until reality sets in after they unfortunately have already lost the $600 and later find (too late) that the hypothetical results shown by the developer/system is not feasible with real money (but only so with using under C2’s “virtual system”).
Collective2 is an awesome platform, simply fantastic. Try to find something with the transparency and power of this platform elsewhere in the investment world–there is nothing like it. But since anyone can publish a system, and there are a number of risky systems that can at first appear to have little downside, it requires some sophistication to use the platform and do well.
Surprise, yes, maybe looking at a Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly or Yearly chart you will see one currency out performing its pair for years and decades but that is not what is happening here. We are talking about and looking at systems that simply are using the Daily ebb and flow and roller coaster effect of the fluctuations of certain currency pairs on a day by day basis to their virtual “advantage” with no risk or real consequences to their own money. Actually, if what you have described was the case then it would indeed be quite easy and simple to trade currency pairs/Forex then, knowing that you would have more than a 50/50 chance (just looking at it’s "trend’) to pick one currency against another that you could rely upon to go in your favor (continuing the underlying trend) lasting for years and decades with no worries. George Soros, “The man who broke the Bank of England”, making over a $1 billion betting against the British Pound, essentially had “virtual” money (with his “infinite” bank roll) and was able to do exactly what some here at C2 are miserably trying to mimic but with no obvious personal risks of their own as Soros had to encounter.
