# Longevity of Systems on C2 **URL:** \ **Category:** C2\ **Created:** [July 30, 2017, 9:26pm UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821 "2017-07-30T21:26:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![GlobalInvestingRep](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/globalinvestingrep/32/673_2.png) [@GlobalInvestingRep](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GlobalInvestingRep)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2017, 9:26pm UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/1 "2017-07-30T21:26:36Z")
The following statistics were posted on another topic but I decided to just start a new topic with the data gathered. I decided to do some research on that very subject (I am sure someone has done this in the past). I just looked at the longevity of every system that is currently available on C2. The results are as follows: Total Systems Available - 577 Systems One Year or Older - 174 Systems Two Years or Older - 69 Systems Three Years or Older - 46 Systems Four Years or Older - 33 Systems Five Years or Older - 15 Systems Six Years or Older - 9 Systems Seven Years or Older - 6 Systems Eight Years or Older - 3 Oldest System on C2 is over 12 Years Old. As is plain to see, there are relatively FEW systems on C2 three years or older (only 46). These number only included systems that are current active/available. I am sure there have been MANY more systems created on this platform but they were either abandoned, killed or the account deleted (I believe it is possible to delete an account, but not sure if the trading history ever disappears). Based on the forgoing statistics, it is probably safe to conclude that the vast majority of systems just don’t make it past 2 years (which many would probably consider a minimum evaluation period), or about 12% of Active Systems. Just something to think about. > **[GIR Global Leaders](https://www.collective2.com/details/104478337)** > > A trading strategy on Collective2. Follow along in your own brokerage account, or try it with a free simulated account. ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2017, 10:43pm UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/2 "2017-07-30T22:43:34Z")
> [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > it is probably safe to conclude that the vast majority of systems just don’t make it past 2 years While this statement is true according to the C2 Grid, here are two elements we should also consider: 1: Do C2 trading systems with “longer” track record (1 year, 2 years, 3 years, etc…) perform better than the others, or simply in general? 2: Precisely because “the vast majority of systems just don’t make it past 2 years”, is it then safe to trade 2-year old (or more) C2 systems, since they are probably about to “disappear” very soon, according to your own analysis? See the problem/paradox here? ---
**Author:** ![MarekJ](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/marekj/32/638_2.png) [@MarekJ](https://forums.collective2.com/u/MarekJ)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2017, 10:53pm UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/3 "2017-07-30T22:53:02Z")
> [@DanceWithTheTrend](#): > > Do C2 trading systems with “longer” track record (1 year, 2 years, 3 years, etc…) perform better than the others, or simply in general? If you average performance of systems \< 1 year old and avg performance of systems \< 2 years old, \< 2years old systems will have better performance. This is the reason why so small number of systems survive 1st year and only “better” systems will do it. I don’t see any paradox here. ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2017, 11:09pm UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/4 "2017-07-30T23:09:04Z")
Here is something else to keep in mind, GlobalInvestingRep : C2 developers can abandon their system(s) for a variety of reasons, and some of them have absolutely nothing to do with the profitability of the system or its drawdown. Here is a perfect example, among others. This trader was one of the most successful C2 developers of all time (see below), his system was making about 20% a year on average (twice the return of the S&P 500!), he had tons and tons of subscribers and yet he chose to abandon it, after 9 years : [https://collective2.com/cgi-perl/system25860974](https://collective2.com/cgi-perl/system25860974) ---
**Author:** ![GlobalInvestingRep](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/globalinvestingrep/32/673_2.png) [@GlobalInvestingRep](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GlobalInvestingRep)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 1:10am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/5 "2017-07-31T01:10:52Z")
> [@DanceWithTheTrend](#): > > > [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > > > it is probably safe to conclude that the vast majority of systems just don’t make it past 2 years > > "While this statement is true according to the C2 Grid, here are two elements we should also consider: > > 1: Do C2 trading systems with “longer” track record (1 year, 2 years, 3 years, etc…) perform better than the others, or simply in general?" > > I would certainly say NO to your question #1. I looked at the 10 oldest active systems on C2 and the average CAGR was only 13.48% and NONE had a Sharpe Ratio over 1.00. > > "2: Precisely because “the vast majority of systems just don’t make it past 2 years”, is it then safe to trade 2-year old (or more) C2 systems, since they are probably about to “disappear” very soon, according to your own analysis? > > See the problem/paradox here?" Although my little exercise in looking at the data on C2 was just to present some variables to discuss, it is really difficult to draw conclusions. As illustrated by the data, the age of a system is certainly not related to better performance, or lower risk. It essentially just means that the developer is still around supporting the system and the system will most likely have a better than average CAGR (but certainly not ALWAYS the case as there is one system older than 10 years with a CAGR less than 4%) because otherwise, they would probably just drop the system. That being said, I believe the biggest reason for the low number of older systems is probably tied to underperformance and the developers just abandon or kill the system and move to something else (or just drop the system for a variety of reasons). > **[GIR Global Leaders](https://www.collective2.com/details/104478337)** > > GIR Global Leaders - trading strategy on Collective2 ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 1:19am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/6 "2017-07-31T01:19:47Z")
> [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > As illustrated by the data, the age of a system is certainly not related to better performance, or lower risk. Excellent point, GlobalInvestingRep, and yet traders and C2 members still believe that “old” systems will necessarily give them superior performance in the long run. Please note that I am absolutely not suggesting that “younger” systems are better, we are simply talking about the real performance of “old” systems, as shown in the Grid. ---
**Author:** ![GlobalInvestingRep](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/globalinvestingrep/32/673_2.png) [@GlobalInvestingRep](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GlobalInvestingRep)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 1:26am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/7 "2017-07-31T01:26:23Z")
Yes, I remember that system! I remember it was featured as one of the “Systems of the Week”, or other “System Profile” a number of years ago. I did not even know it was no longer available.I even searched to see if some explanation was posted explaining why it closed but I have not been able to locate it. It came out of the blocks very strong initially but eventually, through the middle part of it’s life, it was hit with some big drawdowns. Don’t know if that had anything to do with it closing , or not. It displays a CAGR of 19.5% throughout it’s life (it was displaying a MDD of about 40%, but for some reason it is not showing up as of this writing). Just goes to show that a system can be dropped for no apparent reason and the reason may never be known! > **[GIR Global Leaders](https://www.collective2.com/details/104478337)** > > GIR Global Leaders - trading strategy on Collective2 > [@DanceWithTheTrend](#): > > Here is something else to keep in mind, GlobalInvestingRep : C2 developers can abandon their system(s) for a variety of reasons, and some of them have absolutely nothing to do with the profitability of the system or its drawdown. > > Here is a perfect example, among others. > This trader was one of the most successful C2 developers of all time (see below), his system was making about 20% a year on average (twice the return of the S&P 500!), he had tons and tons of subscribers and yet he chose to abandon it, after 9 years : [https://collective2.com/cgi-perl/system25860974](https://collective2.com/cgi-perl/system25860974) ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 1:33am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/8 "2017-07-31T01:33:39Z")
> [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > It came out of the blocks very strong initially but eventually, through the middle part of it’s life, it was hit with some big drawdowns. Don’t know if that had anything to do with it closing , or not. I believe the drawdown was 45% at some point, but the system still continued to attract subscribers like crazy. ---
**Author:** ![GlobalInvestingRep](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/globalinvestingrep/32/673_2.png) [@GlobalInvestingRep](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GlobalInvestingRep)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 1:34am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/9 "2017-07-31T01:34:32Z")
An older system may give the appearance of greater stability, or the trading style of the system may produce less volatility or a smoother equity curve, but the data I look at does not lead me to believe older systems produce higher returns and lower risk. In fact, I would not be surprised to find out that average returns would diminish as systems become older. If I get the time, I will run the numbers on that also. > [@DanceWithTheTrend](#): > > > [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > > > As illustrated by the data, the age of a system is certainly not related to better performance, or lower risk. > > Excellent point, GlobalInvestingRep, and yet traders and C2 members still believe that “old” systems will necessarily give them superior performance in the long run. ---
**Author:** ![GlobalInvestingRep](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/globalinvestingrep/32/673_2.png) [@GlobalInvestingRep](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GlobalInvestingRep)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 1:37am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/10 "2017-07-31T01:37:55Z")
> [@DanceWithTheTrend](#): > > > [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > > > It came out of the blocks very strong initially but eventually, through the middle part of it’s life, it was hit with some big drawdowns. Don’t know if that had anything to do with it closing , or not. > > I believe the drawdown was 45% at some point, but the system still continued to attract subscribers like crazy. I am pretty sure that probably had to do with it’s longevity at the time! > **[GIR Global Leaders](https://www.collective2.com/details/104478337)** > > GIR Global Leaders - trading strategy on Collective2 ---
**Author:** ![GlobalInvestingRep](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/globalinvestingrep/32/673_2.png) [@GlobalInvestingRep](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GlobalInvestingRep)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 1:42am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/11 "2017-07-31T01:42:42Z")
> [@DanceWithTheTrend](#): > > > [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > > > As illustrated by the data, the age of a system is certainly not related to better performance, or lower risk. > > Please note that I am absolutely not suggesting that “younger” systems are better, we are simply talking about the real performance of “old” systems, as shown in the Grid. Agreed! > **[GIR Global Leaders](https://www.collective2.com/details/104478337)** > > GIR Global Leaders - trading strategy on Collective2 ---
**Author:** ![GalBarak](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/galbarak/32/1487_2.png) [@GalBarak](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GalBarak)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 3:56am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/12 "2017-07-31T03:56:32Z")
> [@GlobalInvestingRep](#): > > Total Systems Available - 577 577 available out of 15,000+ strategies. Just to put things in perspective. “Collective2 was founded in 2001. It has more than 90,000 registered users and 15,000 published strategies.” > **[Collective2 surpasses $50 Million in investor capital connected to platform –...](https://trade.collective2.com/collective2-surpasses-50-million-in-investor-capital-connected-to-platform/)** > > Rye Brook, NY — October 18 — Collective2.com, the online platform which connects investors with traders, today announced that it has surpassed $50 Million dollars in investor capital linked to strategies on the platform. The increase represents... ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 5:14am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/13 "2017-07-31T05:14:36Z")
> [@GalBarak](#): > > 577 available out of 15,000+ strategies. Just to put things in perspective. Thousands of these strategies were probably created just out of curiosity, for fun or simply for testing purposes only, with no real intention of broadcasting trading signals on an ongoing basis, or paying the recurring listing fees. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Trading](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/london_trading/32/10672_2.png) [@London\_Trading](https://forums.collective2.com/u/London_Trading)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 5:19am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/14 "2017-07-31T05:19:19Z")
BTW topaz stopped attracting subscribers after it’s first dd they all left , so no it wasn’t attracting subscribers like crazy when the system was killed . ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 5:32am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/15 "2017-07-31T05:32:34Z")
> [@London\_Trading](#): > > BTW topaz stopped attracting subscribers after it’s first dd they all left , so no it wasn’t attracting subscribers like crazy when the system was killed Not quite my friend. If you look at the chart you will notice that the biggest drawdown (44.13%) started in 2011 and lasted 1 year, and yet the system was abandoned only last year. So obviously the strategy was still attracting new traders during all that time. Which also shows that traders are more willing to overlook medium to large drawdowns if the system has a relatively long track record. ---
**Author:** ![GalBarak](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/galbarak/32/1487_2.png) [@GalBarak](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GalBarak)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 5:38am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/16 "2017-07-31T05:38:58Z")
Perhaps a large amount of those 15,000, or a small amount, or half maybe, or one third, or more? I don’t read minds. Just quoting the facts. Only 69 systems are two years or older, so perhaps the vast majority of the systems created from 2001 to 2015 were just for fun too, who knows. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Trading](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/london_trading/32/10672_2.png) [@London\_Trading](https://forums.collective2.com/u/London_Trading)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 5:44am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/17 "2017-07-31T05:44:12Z")
No it wasn’t attracting subscribers maybe a couple , but it certainly it wasn’t attracting subscribers like crazy at the time when it was killed i was watching the system and i know . They all left after the DD , it is irreverent why he kept it running years after that . Its a mediocre system that no one wanted to subscribe to after the big DD . ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 5:55am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/18 "2017-07-31T05:55:19Z")
> [@London\_Trading](#): > > Its a mediocre system That “mediocre” system made almost 20% a year on average, double the return of a buy and hold strategy. Wall Street traders would kill for that kind of return. ---
**Author:** ![LiveForexSignals](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/liveforexsignals/32/1905_2.png) [@LiveForexSignals](https://forums.collective2.com/u/LiveForexSignals)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 6:36am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/19 "2017-07-31T06:36:29Z")
> [@GalBarak](#): > > Only 69 systems are two years or older, so perhaps the vast majority of the systems created from 2001 to 2015 were just for fun too, who knows. Millions of Facebook, Wordpress and Gmail accounts are created every single day, for all kinds of reasons, but how many will still be active in three, five or ten years? Seriously. ---
**Author:** ![GalBarak](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex028/user_avatar/forums.collective2.com/galbarak/32/1487_2.png) [@GalBarak](https://forums.collective2.com/u/GalBarak)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2017, 7:22am UTC](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821/20 "2017-07-31T07:22:30Z")
That’s a good question. I guess not a very small percentage of the facebook and the gmail accounts. As for the wordpress, well probably most will be discarded, for similar reasons as C2 systems. Edit: if the facebook / gmail include those that aren’t personal but created for biz usage, then yes many of those may be discarded as well. [Next page](https://forums.collective2.com/t/longevity-of-systems-on-c2/10821.md?page=2)