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.
Want to guess what day the first autotrader started copying this number one strategy on C2?
May 21st!!!
Since then this is how it looks:
It still made money, which is great, but obviously nothing like the results that people were probably hoping for. A reality check probably could have told you everything the fancy stats couldn’t.
This is one of those C2 Star certified strategies that must follow the stringent drawdown rules. Its obvious that once it got C2 Star certified the trade leader became ultra conservative with his trades and even reduced his trade size.
As you will notice in the track record prior to May 16th the strategy was rescaled since you cannot trade 0.9 contracts of mini dow.
Yes and this is an example of how track records can sometimes fool people but unfortunately its all investors have to go on to make decision to invest or not.
If C2 star certification starts expanding its certification criteria or add new certification levels I would hope we see more consistent strategies but with larger profits for the subs.
Goodhart’s law at work…
Good point. He probably got certified around the same time. I imagine that the rolling 60 day out performance will fail at some point in the near future though now that real money is following it.
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.
I totally agree with this.
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.
I agree with the love but that doesn’t mean I can’t make a point that there are obviously some very different results pre and post real money following the system. Personally I think C2 star should include a TOS requirement to prevent this.
Why dont C2star reset the performance gain when its certified ? or indicate the performance since C2star ?
Dont you think its kind of misleading for investor showing strategy performance of 43.6% pre c2star but 3.4% performance after c2star or after first real subscriber? I assume most subscriber had the intention of a 43% performance strategy with low draw down vs 3.4% strategy with low draw down.
I think it is certainly fair to point out the difference between purely hypothetical fills and avg fills based on real money. Really there already is a way it just takes some digging which is why I thought it was an interesting post topic. But I wouldn’t be against it being made more clear. Maybe a filter like the leverage filter that shows one color on the chart for results with and without real fills. It may be a bit complicated though.
I’ve no comment on if this is a good or bad strategy, but no real system will go up in a straight line. It is normal to have periods of drawdown.
Regards B48ES
C2 Star must be mandatory TOS 100% otherwise it is not C2 Star.
I agree there will be periods of drawdown in any good system, but it seems like it is a common pattern for systems to have very different behavior starting almost immediately after TOS, live auto traders, or getting star certified.
I think thats a good idea. Maybe add another stat to the strategy that indicates performance since the last C2star certification since a strategy can go on and off the program or at least highlight the equity chart where the certification started.
I was willing to apply for C2Star with my Multi Timeframe Forex, but one of the requirements is that the strategy has to have equity of $40-60k. Unfortunately I am trading with higher equity and despite having TOS 100% badge I can’t apply.
I am not very happy with that requirement, hopefully they will change it shortly and scale the requirements for other equity levels.
If you look at those most c2star charts, they all made their gains before joining c2star, and now they are all flat-line for the past 2-3 months.
Yes thats why I think it would be useful to see an indication of when the strategy started trading after certification to give a truer picture of how well it is performing while under the program.
Nothing against the certification process itself but it just would give a real picture since the trade leaders seem to trade vastly different after being certified.
It should be colored when certified like this.
Not against not being supported here. Just make it clear observation.
Sad. The definition of top strategy needs to be revised/
“MINI DOW 123071731” has been removed from C2Star program, since then, It begin to grow up. now It ranked 6th on c2. which is very good.
That is great to see! Did most of the gains of this strategy come when it was or was not C2Star? Is there a way to know?
