The opinions expressed in these forums do not represent those of C2, and any discussion of profit/loss
is not indicative of future performance or success.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading. You should therefore carefully consider
whether such trading is suitable for you in light of your financial condition. You should read,
understand, and consider the Risk Disclosure Statement that is provided by your broker
before you consider trading. Most people who trade lose money.
What is your view on adding a simple statistics to each developer profile?
Cumulated “real money” P&L of all systems.
Ie sum of profit&loss purely from auto-traded accounts (including TOS) of all systems created by the vendor.
It should be simple to pullout and would quickly show whether a vendor has been able to generate actual profit for his subscribers overtime, with real money.
We would screen out easily vendors who blow up accounts, vendors who game the system, vendors who lose money due to slippage, vendors who just rely on monopoly money, etc.
It should be in the common interest of everyone here.
Potential subscribers wouldn’t be able to draw any meaningful conclusion from the total P/L of all systems because each C2 strategy has its own annual return and drawdown.
Here is an example.
P/L of system A: -$20 000 (minus $20K)
P/L of system B: +$10 000
So the total P/L for this particular trader leader is -$10 000 (minus $10K), even though his last system (system B) is currently making 50% a year with a 10% maximum drawdown, while system A has already been abandoned a long time ago (but is still visible on the track record).
I like the idea of some sort of “real money” metric. I think it could help show if they are doing trades that are realistic with real money rather than purely hypothetical trade data. I also like that it could potentially help show if people see enough promise to actually tie money to it. There is a link somewhere to the top strategies by AUM. It still seems to suffer from the same thing as the popularity board. I’ll see if I can find it.
As we can clearly see, there seems to be no statistical correlation whatsoever between AUM and C2 rank.
I mean it seems natural to assume that C2 systems with a lot of real money under management must also have the highest rank, but that does not seem to be case, except for a couple of systems like LUCIDMNQ for instance.
What I believe is happening is because some of those systems are well-established they are attracting larger investments from only a few individuals. Not huge returns but a sense of security.
Gardcap told me he only has 20 subs, how is that possible?
If someone just invested in the strategies in that AUM board on August 25th, 2022 (earliest record I could find) and held the same strategies until today these are the results. Not great unfortunately. Of course, the metric you recommended @InfinityC3274 may be a good signal still since it is pretty different.
August 25th, 2020 to October 19th, 2022
AUM Weighted Return
-9.67%
Average Strategy Return
-6.74%
Max
119.72%
Min
-118.18%
S&P Div Reinvested
8.41%
BND Div Reinvested
-16.86%
Here is a video showing how I got the numbers and a simple method to do it for some other leaderboards etc. without any coding.
In my opinion real estate is king, when it seems like the market is tanking it’s not so ez to press a button & bail only to have it rebound. Buy n Hold is another option that may make you 7% historically. Bottom line for the subs wanting to make larger sums easily and complaining about leaders, maybe you should have put yourself in a position to be able to afford 1-2 mill. in properties or long term stock holdings. This is a risky game and that’s stated everywhere on this site.
And for those concerned with leaders coming back to create new systems, typically when someone does something subpar, they learn and improve upon their mistakes. Not always the case but more so than not it is.
The purpose of the metric is not to rank systems. The purpose of the metric is to rank “system developers”, and help subscribers easily filter out unscrupulous developers with poor risk management skills (or care for clients’ money).
The AUM data is interesting but it’s not the same thing. AUM does not mean P&L. P&L is built over time and with consistency. Conversely, a high AUM can be built in just a few months by greedy subscribers, even for very new systems. And some systems in the top10 AUM table are indeed very recent (and will unlikely pass the test of time).
Also, assuming that AUM in August can predict performance over the next 2-3 months is not realistic. Why would that be the case?
The correlation to C2star is also not relevant. Remember that Walter has two c2star systems (still active) but managed to have a 50% drawdown with just 1 trade with Momentum Trends, with real money subscribers (then took the system private).
Overall, I just think more information is better than less information. No matter how a system may be performing currently… would you not want to know whether this system has been created by Radio Dalio (who made $$ for clients overtime) or Bernie Madoff (who lost $$ for clients)?
Such a great point. I think so many people do better with real estate simply because it’s harder to buy and sell and you don’t get flashing red charts in an online login telling you your house or property dropped in value over the last 24 hours.
But I really don’t think that a C2 list of the top Trade Leaders (those who made the most money for their subscribers) will give you ANY specific trading edge, just like the AUM list we just talked about.
In fact studies show that mutual and hedge funds that make good money for their clients during a year or two tend to do very poorly the following years, and some of them even disappear into obscurity, never to be seen again.
If simply following the current top traders/earners led to consistently great results, we would all be billionaires by now.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results, let’s keep this in mind…
