Not sure how many investors get caught up in illiquid stocks, where the actual fill prices (under autotrade) are often distant from the original limit/entry price issued by the trade-leader…
C2 tries to solve this through something called VWAP (Volume Weighted Average Price), which is fair-play on their part but not really an ideal solution. Often, when trading illiquid stocks, the limit price entry triggered by the trade-leader, instantly eats up all the available (very limited) stock in the market for a few, and then remaining investors who autotrade are left with ‘market-fill’ orders, which in some cases are so far away from the original intended entry, that in reality they would never trade at these heavily above-limit prices.
It is a conundrum, for investors, trade leaders, and I suspect C2 - one which they do try hard to resolve and explain, but alas, the market is the market, and the problem is not the trade-leader or C2, but ‘illiquid’ stocks. It is one of the reasons I recommend investors consider carefully when selecting strategies, and opt for higher-liquidity markets, as opposed to small/micro-cap stocks. One strategy I noticed yesterday which had been going well for many weeks (Fission Fund) suddenly traded a small-cap chinese stock, and as the stock tanked, exit fills on this ranged by an outrageous 20%. I try to build strategies which take this into account (as other trade-leaders should in my opinion), as it would enhance the qualititative appeal of C2…
For example, one strategy I run focuses 100% on only S&P500 stocks, which has worked well for me (see below). Although the strategy is only a month old, I do pay attention to autotrade fills for my subs, and have noted the price ramains fairly consistent across autotraders, purely due to the higher volume traded in S&P stocks…
Liquidity is an often overlooked, but important consideration when selecting strategies. I thought I would put this out there, hopefully encourage a constructive discussion…