I would like to make a suggestion for the “Trading Permissions” page: Add a subscriber-defined stop-loss functionality. E.g. I would specify a stop-loss of 5% and for every signal sent out by the vendor, C2 would automatically add a stop-loss order (only in case the vendor doesn’t use stop-losses). In this way I can be sure (up to a certain level, as their still can be gaps) that I never risk more than X% of my capital on a trade. I don’t know if this could have prevented the sudden large losses in systems like Penny Stock Movers and Eclipse FX, but I think it’s a useful functionality for many subscribers.
An alternative would be some sort of “panic” functionality on the “Trading permissions” page, where C2 would send closing orders for all open positions if the equity level drops more than X% from the previous high. Of course, X would be defined by every subscriber individually.
I agree that it would be good to have that feature for some systems.
It should be accompanied by some warning for unexperienced users, because a too tight stop loss can easily ruin a system’s performance.
It could be argued that such a protection against dangerous trades isn’t C2’s responsibility, but nevertheless, it would be convenient in some cases.
This feature would logically conflict with the TradeBullet synchronization feature. So an important question is which feature should override the other. If the user activates both, and if there is no special programming to deal with this situation, then the synchronization feature will probably override the user stop loss (since the C2 system keeps the position open, TradeBullet would immediately re-open the position in the user’s account).
I can imagine that a user wants the opposite priority, i.e. something like “stay in sync with C2 unless the system becomes too dangerous”, but it is more logical to build that into TradeBullet than into C2.
Even without this kind of subtle interaction I believe that it would be somewhat more logical to build this into TradeBullet/ TradeBolt etc. Unless that is done soon, it is also a good idea to have it in C2.
I suggested on the TradeBullet forum to make this part of TradeBullet in the first place, but apparently that can’t be done as it would confuse the C2 server.
I think the logic should be that this “subscriber-generated stop-loss signal” is treated by C2 as if it was generated by the vendor (of course not for performance statistics). In that case it shouldn’t conflict with the synchronization feature. In addition, the signal should be cancelled as soon as the position is closed by the vendor or as soon as the vendor places his own stop-loss.
