Rescaling problems

Dear Matthew,

I rescaled my system about 9 hours ago and the graph does not reflect the statistics. The system is up 13.3% and did not go into negative territory. However, the chart shows a large dip beneath the original amount invested and currently stands at break even ($5000).

The correct plot would seem to be the ‘before commission’ line, which historically has been identical to the equity line (no commission in forex).

Many thanks

We are required by regulators to include AutoTrading fees ($0.50 per 10,000) and your subscription costs in the equity line.

Well it just doesn’t make sense - the Total System Equity reads $5,572 at the time of writing, whereas the chart shows just over $5,000.

Just to add - the gremlin can be spotted when you compare the mini chart that pops up when you hover over the name of my system (which is correct) against the large chart on the system’s page.

Sorry to bombard you, but I zoomed in and it shows the correct figures (btw - the commission should be about $35, rather than the $500 it has knocked off). It seems that the error is only apparent on the unzoomed chart.

You charge $125 per month as subscription. This is included in the costs.

Matthew, this is quite frustrating. I know that the subscription costs are taken into account. My problem is that my stats state that the equity in my system is $5,612. The chart reads as around $5000. So one of these is evidently wrong. Furthermore, if you zoom into the chart, it gives a totally different amount than the equity curve on the unzoomed chart.

Please take the time to have a look at this. It is a genuine complaint that has nothing to do with a lack of understanding regarding subscription charges being deducted. There are two figures being displayed on my page, and they contradict one another.

You write:

"My problem is that my stats state that the equity in my system is $5,612. The chart reads as around $5000. So one of these is evidently wrong."

I disagree. $5,612 is the equity before your subscription costs and commissions are taken into account. A bit less than $5,000 is the equity when those two costs are taken into account. There is nothing wrong about this. You are charging $125 per month.

Now, the reason the subscription costs don’t show up if you zoom is because the subscription costs are applied to charts as if you started trading when the chart begins. So, for example, if your system charges $100 per month and has been around for three months, then $300 dollars would be removed from your overall system equity when you view the entire (unzoomed) chart. If you zoom into a small period of the chart, say 33 days, only one subscription event would be included for $100 dollars.

Well if it has been taken into account, and the system has been running for about 11 months, shouldn’t the discrepancy be $125x11 ($1375) dollars, not $500? This doesn’t seem to explain the difference of $500.

You are charging $125 per profitable month. Not all your months have been profitable.

But I am forcing a recalc of the commission costs. Let me see if this does the trick… Will be a few minutes.

It still shows a difference that I can’t really fathom. The figures are correct but the chart is totally out.

I do not agree there is a problem. The difference between the green line (equity minus system subscription costs and commissions) and the gray line (pure equity, no costs) is about $600 or so dollars, which is accounted for in your trade execution costs ($0.50 per 10,000) and your system subscription ($125 per profitable month so long as your system is above the high water mark). This is correct.

Perhaps the confusion here is that you were not aware that subscription fees require that your equity be above the high-water mark in order to be charged…? (Not immediately obvious, I agree.)

I don’t agree. Take a look at the mini chart that pops up when you hover over the name of my system. This is different to the chart that features on my page.

My problem is with the consistency and the rationale. I understand that the subscription fee is factored in, but why doesn’t this show up in the mini chart for example? Also, why is this only $600? By my calculations the deduction should be at least $900 including commission of $0.5 per lot.

Matthew - the mini-chart is incorrect. The green line (without commissions) is identical to the blue line (with typical commissions) on the main chart. The mini-chart should either be calculating the commissions (which it isn’t), or the color of the line should be changed from green to blue.

Hi, Steve:

Yes, the problem was that the system subscription costs was not included in the little popup mini-charts, but was included in the main system chart. This is now fixed: even the little inline popup charts will show commissions plus system subscription fees hen you mouse over a system. Thanks for bringing to my attention. - MK

I had been pointing out repeatedly that the two charts differed. I am flabbergasted, and deeply unimpressed, that it took someone else pointing this out in order to get the consistency issue of my own system resolved.

Hi, C -

I apologize. I guess the mental block I was experiencing is that you were insisting the "big" chart (on the system page) was wrong, and it was not.

What I should gleaned was that you believed it was wrong because it differed from the little popup chart elsewhere on the site (which was indeed wrong, in that it lacked subscription fee costs).

I kept staring at the wrong thing. Sorry!


C - Matthew runs an incredible service don’t you think? It’s a big task for a small business to manage all aspects of it. So don’t judge too harshly. He always owns up to his mistakes. Sometimes you need a sledge hammer though.

Hey Matthew, no worries, I’m glad it’s all sorted now. And Steve, you’re totally right - it is a very impressive operation. Maybe it’s time to expand the payroll??

Keep up the good work MK.