Why cant collective 2 for transparency allow one to see all programs developed by the creator. Many times it would show how many strategies the person has made but only available to see several of them. Being able to see a program how it feared before it crashed ( assumption) would enable people to make a more educated decision before jumping on someones short lived success.
Click on Trade leader profile then click on strategy activity details , it will give you the leader’s activity .
Activity doesn’t really show anything other than the trader created the strategy, rename it so on. What we are looking for is the trader’s performance.
Let consider this, for an oil/lumber/nat gas strategy, in one year time, it can either go down, up, or stay the same. If a trader creates 3 strategies that bets up (Long), down (Short), stay the same (selling call and put options), at the end of the year, he will have 1 strategy that really looks good, of course 2 of them are busted.
There is a grave danger in allowing trader to hide strategy.
I completely agree with @daniel_hirsch on this. Collective2 states that they want to allow traders an opportunity to build a public track record.
This is a great thing as it can allow anyone to demonstrate their ability to trade well and consistently over a long period of time. However, the ability to hide every strategy that doesn’t work out seems to completely defeat the purpose of a public record! We can usually learn a lot more about a trader based on how they behave when the market goes against them then when everything is going well.
There are some excellent traders and systems on this platform but it can be hard for anyone to consistently identify them when full transparency isn’t enforced. I must add that allowing trader to not only hide systems but actually start entire new accounts is even much more concerning! In my time at Collective2 I have witnessed several traders crash accounts multiple times only to begin yet another time with a new screen name! This not only costs investors A LOT of money over time but it also makes the platform seem much less transparent. At a minimum, if a trader is allowed to open a new alias, there should be some sort of obvious linkage between all of that traders accounts (for example, “this trader is also known as…”).
Collective2 wants to be taken seriously as an alterative to hedge funds and the platform has so much potential. Let’s allow for full transparency that will continue to encourage good traders and good investors to build this great platform together!
There are hundreds of hedge funds, mutual funds and ETFs that crash every year, only to re-open legally the next year, under a different name.
And yet you don’t see their owners behind bars now, do you?
I truly believe that each C2 system must be judged by its own merit, no matter who the trader is and how many systems (good or bad) he created in the past.
We are looking for transparency and accountability not punishment. Opening new systems with new names isn’t the issue here rather the various methods of masking/hiding previous results is.
This statement doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense for this platform. Traders create C2 systems and investors need to be able to make educated assessments of trading behaviors. Of course traders can have systems that succeed and those that fail. However, if we can’t see transparency, how do investors know to ask the manager of the latest fantastic new system, “what have you learned from previous mistakes and what has changed with the new system?”
Here’s the steps:
Strategy 1: Jan 1, you buy 100% BOIL
Strategy 2: Jan 1, you buy 100% KOLD
Strategy 3: You sell Call and Put option on UNG
Hide all the strategies.
2 of 3 the strategy will go bankrupt.
After 6 months or 1 year, unhide and Advertise the surviving strategy.
All I’m asking is, give us the FULL DISCLOSURE - the information about the trader performance. Tell me a valid regulatory / legal / logical reason that the trader’s real performance data is not shared with the investor.
@ForexStar2 , whether you win this argument is not really important to me but the forum reader getting the wrong impression is harmful.
Here’s a more detail steps by steps how to cheat:
- Buy on Jan 1 then close the position on each end of the quarter - after 6 months means July 1 and Oct 1, giving some time for the trend to work.
- Buy 100% BOIL for 2 strategies
- Buy 100% KOIL for 2 strategies
- Another strategy, we know it’s going to bust, sell Call and Put
- At the end, one strategy will be very attractive: Buy BOIL and sell on Oct 1 2021. It went up 234%.
There are 5 strategies involved. I have seen person who has 3 strategies open but he has 17 total.
You are saying $99/month is expensive to pay for the strategy? You are earing back $150 from one person/month.
@ForexStar2, once you make a strategy private or hidden, we can’t see them any more, I tried it. You still haven’t answered us, what’s the Regulatory Reason / Rational / for the good of the investor, we hide the performance of the trader?
You mentioned that there is a way to see a Trader’s detail activities. Please help us with the following.
Here is a example:
Trader Profile Activity:
All the following strategies are hidden, so how do we see the “equity curve”. I’m not even sure what is that.
Click on the hidden strategy and replace the word details with the word performance in the address link .
___Thank You @matesee ___
As you can clearly see, C2 does not hide anything from the public, you can always access the Trade Leader profile at any time, and look at the equity curve of each trading system he/she created, even the “private” ones.
I have multiple C2 accounts myself, but I can certainly see an argument for only allowing one account per person.
I think allowing the leader to remain anonymous to the public could still stay, but I think it would reduce charlatans if there was a way for C2 to ensure that there is only one leader account per person. I think that would be somewhat difficult to ensure across so many countries, but I’m sure there is a way. They seem to already verify leaders, but allow them to have multiple accounts.
The original poster is only asking why some strategies are not available for viewing (not a true statement as we just demonstrated), the multiple accounts subject you are mentioning is an entirely different story (feel free to open your own special thread if you like).
There is an incredibly big difference between being able to view a snapshot of a systems “equity curve” and being able to actually open that system to view its historical trades and metrics. Wise investors will know that equity curves are nearly meaningless if they can’t understand the risk and trading behaviors associated with achieving those results.
So no, unless I am missing something here, we didn’t really answer the original posters question…
Actually if the equity curve is nice and going up most likely the developer will keep it public .
So i dont see the issue here .
So if you see a chart with a 65% drawdown and a minus 60% return for example, that info is meaningless because… you cannot view its historical trades and metrics?
Would you even consider trading such system?
And let’s not forget that you cannot subscribe to a private system, by definition, so getting its metrics is of no use anyway.
True, but if the results are good or even excellent then the trader leader has no reason to make his system private, unless his strategy cannot tolerate a large number of subscribers (he is trading relatively illiquid markets for instance).
Ironically, one of your own C2 systems is in a private mode, and yet here you are complaining about…private systems.
I am not judging you at all and I couldn’t care less about private systems (that’s a non-issue for me), I just think that it is a little bit odd.
This is the first that I have heard that one of my systems is in “private mode” and I have seem to have no ability to change that. It is good to know about it. I certainly have nothing I wish to hide but assume that C2 automatically did that for my inactive account?
If that’s the case then it is also safe to assume that a lot of systems have been made private due to inactivity.
Yes, if that same trade leader has another system that is performing very well then I would want to look into their system(s) that failed.
- Perhaps they learned some new trading skills since their disaster. Excellent! Then we can consider investing in this great system.
- Or perhaps they are still doing the same exact behaviors that created extra risk in their failed system(s) and will likely cause failure in their (currently) fabulous system. Probably a bad idea to invest in this system regardless of current results, as, without a change in trading style, the great new system will likely become just like their failed system.
The original post in this thread was about asking for transparency to make informed decisions. Perhaps this information isn’t at all important to you but it is important to some others.