I don’t know, guys. When I read hard-hitting criticism of a C2 strategy that begins with:
“It still made money, which is great…”
then I tend to discount that criticism a bit.
Here’s the deal. C2Star certification rewards strategies that attempt to control risk. (No guarantees, of course.) C2Star also requires that strategies outperform the S&P index over a pretty short-term period, 60 days. (It isn’t reasonable to ask for a strategy to outperform consistently on a period any shorter than that.)
So if you want to subscribe to strategies that are high-risk/high-reward, by all means, please do. There’s certainly a case to be made for doing that, and if you have risk capital available, dedicating a portion of it to strategies with highly-variable outcomes may be a good idea.
But your criticism of C2Star strategies that (so far) show low drawdowns, tight risk controls, and still generally modestly beat the index seems a bit misguided.
Let’s not hate. Let’s love.