I had a strategy on my watch list which seems to have had great difficulty this week and another one on a mental watch list that seems to not exist now. It appears that the liquidating value of mcprotrader has been bouncing above and below -$20K . . . It seems as if, in order to have a more realistic testing situation in the time of hypothetical trading, or real trading . . . that some sort of margin calls and liquidation should take place . . . just as in actual situations with an actual broker. I had thought that c2 already did this . . . but if they did, then, presumably, c2 would liquidate positions in a strategy such as mcprotrader on the way down to near zero . . . but on the other hand, some brokerages sometimes only pay attention to some margin problems once a day. Maybe that is why mcprotrader is permitted to bounce around a -$20k. Does anyone know what are the positions in mcprotrader that have now a negative value?
Also, if you go over to the strategy listing for Mozart, then, the statistics part says max drawdown of 52%, but when you read the trade listings, and you look at the most recent trade, it lists a max drawdown of 92%. Does anyone know how it is that these numbers are so different? If a person is in a trade that causes his worst drawdown, then, that number would presumably by the one listed also in the max drawdown box.
There were some irrational trades before this disaster. When I asked the developer about an explanation he could not give me a satisfactory answer, so I declined to subscribe.
there is another big move coming next, and more clueless amateur greedy strategy sellers will belly up again.
I believe c2 let you have a draw down more than 100% and still able to stay on c2 and continue. They don’t want to force margin call on the leader which have no real trade, and force the sub with to sell. They might have more money in their acct and not get a margin call.
Maybe c2 should just automatically close systems that has over 100% draw down.
Because the drawdown for a single trade, no matter how bad, isn’t the drawdown for the system as a whole. If you look at the CSV, there are 249 closed trades but he’s made 251 trades in all. Obviously those two open trades had enough profit between them to offset the one bad XIV trade.
Drawdown of 100% with the loss of 50k will be only 1% loss for the subscriber with 10% scaling and capital of 500k. C2 provides signals flow, C2 percentage is often irrelevant to actual percentage for subs trading.
Anyone here subscribed to “A Strategy for YM”? I know it survived the crash but they were on an annual recess I guess during most parts of this volatility.
Looking at their auto-trade history, it seems they keep adding and reducing positions while keeping at least 1 contract open and some individual trades show DD of as high as 24%. Is this a martingale system? Does it have good risk management (hard stops, position sizing, etc.). I would appreciate any subscriber insight.
I sub to YM. he was either lucky he was on vacation or good. he got back in the other day and drew down over 20k but ended up with a gain. he adds to winning trades and gets starts positions small. He does add to losing trades only if he feels it will come back. so far it’s the only system that made me money. Every other system went bust.
Thanks for that insight. Does he communicate about his method? Rationale for trades? Do you feel comfortable when he adds to losing trades because he “feels” it will reverse or does he share any reasoning for adding?
we could still be in for another equities rough ride down from the looks of it. Another fairly sized down day so far.
A good stop loss system would have worked because even the regular hours dip (over 14%) was too big to keep in the trade.
Yes that is what I meant by, “Of course for many it would have because a pretty big drop during rth occurred before the major drop.” However, we can’t assume that everyone’s models would have been in then stopped out. Some may have and did buy in close to the end of day. A stop wouldn’t and didn’t help people in that scenario. To be the only way to really protect yourself is to have a wide allocation of assets or have option hedges.
I just saw pretty much R option or Randbots everything is in $vix or $xiv. So he’s done. Or draw down all over 30-50%
Oh wow, you’re right. I didn’t even think of looking at Mario’s systems because I assumed he was wise enough to get through it. He had a LOT of subscribers and was well respected. The system’s not over but I can’t imagine a subscriber who would take a chance on that broken equity curve/drawdown.
Please do the math for me. 100% draw down on 50k is 1% of 500k? But 50k is 10% of 500k, how is 50k draw down only 1% of 500k?
On a trade leader side:
50k equity drops 100%, 50k loss
On a subscriber side:
10% scaling means 5k loss only
5k loss on 500k capital is 1%
I had these two strategies in my portfolio.
They were among the most popular Futures strategies before this February.
Even though they recovered most of the losses by now, they failed miserably two weeks ago.
I’m glad I was able to close the positions manually in time.
No stop loss & poor risk-management.
I was especially disappointed by XLN 500 SP Emini.
The trader assured me in January that he was using stop loss. Bullocks!
Unfortunately we can’t supervise every trader if they really put a stop loss,
so I guess a own security stop losses through C2 is recommended. (just in case the trader forgot)
Redcrest - “In an adverse movement, we can see a drawdown of up to 25% that recovers as soon as a new trend emerges”. Unless the new trend doesn’t emerge. oops, -53%…
Don’t you see the stop losses when they enter the trade? Or they just say they were “mental” stop losses (imaginary IMO).