T2ESSwingM1060 E Mini swing trading system update

Just a quick update on my E Mini S&P 500. As you probably have read before, we started trading this system around the 6th of June of this year. Just wanted to highlight that the first month of trading was profitable, +6% for the month. We have completed 8 trades through today (July 11) and had 7 winners and one loser.

Still operating statistically better than the hypothetical backtesting and validation results. I am trading this system at Tradestation along side my subscribers. Still trying to figure out a way to show the data that confirms this. It is difficult to see on the monthly report from TS. C2 does not support TS for TOS, but we are auto trading.

Check out the first month statistics on this strategy.

since you don’t have a long track record on here it’s very risky. i’m willing to take that risk if you make the system $30 a month.

For $30 a month, I am in too.

I’m actually going the other way in my thinking. I presently trade the system myself, so a winning month provides income without any subscription revenue. I have always felt that you get what you pay for. I already allow for a 30 day free trial and will eventually eliminate this after the first 6 months of trading.

Rather than just looking at a track record or an equity curve one should understand the methodology of the developer, how he approaches his system development, the mathematical and statistical rigor applied and what is his overall back ground. These are much more important in the long run.

If you are just chasing performance and jumping from one strategy to another one, then good luck with that. I would do much more due diligence on developers and stay with ones that present their testing methodology and how they abide by their own rules.

One issue with C2 is for a developer, one price fits all. That is, if a subscribers trades one contract or 10 contracts, the development fee is the same.

For my strategy which is focused directly on the E mini S&P, trading one contract made 6% or around $600 for the subscriber. A $100 fee still returned around 5% to the subscriber. If a subscriber traded 3 contracts then trading in June would give them around $1800, so the $100 fee is immaterial.

My intention is that if the program continues to represent the statistical results of my development efforts and still remains within the expected Mathematical expectation for the strategy, the fee will probably go up and the trial period will be shorter.

I know this is not what you want to hear, but my income off the strategy is what I care about. I just post it on C2 to show people what realistically can be done by a trader who has 40 years of experience in this business and does not and will not over promise.

If you want the see what the methodology is and how it was developed, I have a data sheet describing the strategy and my background in detail and you can make your own decision.

You can reach me at jim@t2trades.com


unfortunately there has been too many fly by night systems on c2 so many people only have track records to go by. People can write all they want about system descriptions, we have all been burned a few times.

If you don’t lower the price then you will just have to wait until that track record builds up and people will join.

This is a system with a short track record which has been in draw down for well over half of it’s history. Needs more time, but the first trades look promising. Hope you are not trading without a stop loss, your first loss was against a potentially hard correction and could have been a big hit without a stop in place.

Statistical error on 10 trades is around 30%. Do you expect your future results to be 30% worse compare to what you have now for one month?

So in the future we should see decrease in the returns since the system will start to represent backtest results better. Why the fee may go up if the expected returns will go down compare to first month?

Almost all newcomers at C2 present their past experience and system dev methods as a very-very important reason to subscribe for their system. Unfortunately not all of them achieve even 1 year track record.


I would expect that the program long term revert to the mathematical expectations and the Monte Carlo simulation results. The mathematical expectations for the system show that 75% of the months be profitable going forward and that the profitable trades revert to 60% with a profit factor of 1.80+. The MOM (annual return/ Max drawdown) should exceed 1 as we go through more months.

So your conclusion is correct. I do expect the system to have more losing trades then appeared in the first 6 weeks, but the long term performance should be positive and quite acceptable. I will have to go back to my development work and see what the one and two standard deviations were for the Monte Carlo results. I will publish this when I find them.

Again, all of these calculations are based upon a $10K investment for 1 contract. I believe the mistake that was made is that I set the investment minimum too low for 1 contract. In my professional career I usually used $25K per contract which would change the return and drawdown statistics percentages dramatically. Over the last 4 years of this development (unseen data - validation data) the annual returns ranged from 33% to 100% but that is a very small sample.

Thanks for your insight. I need to do a revised calculation for an account size of $10K. I will provide the results shortly.

You may want to show numbers related to one contract trading in dollar terms. I believe this will be more appropriate for futures trading. Percentages are correct for only limited cases of trading. Potential subscriber can calculate percents by himself in relation to his own capital.


I was only referring to how C2 displays the results. I will include dollar levels per 1 contract in the future. Good idea


The strategy went “private”. Last time I’ve checked it it was around 0. What happened?


It was just not worth the effort or cost anymore. Even with the drawdown August started out pretty well, but gaining subscribers is not worth the cost. Also, the fills the clients were getting were much worse than I was getting from TS. I think that was due to the many layers we had to go through to post a trade (it was all automated but usually cost clients a tick). Not a big deal, but a hassle if I ever listed a day trading program.

Collective2 is a great idea but too many charlatans on the site to compete with. There is no question I could show an amazing program to attract the attention of traders, but it probably would not have slippage that would be required. It would look good but no clients would be making money.

Thanks for following me in my brief stint on the web site but I would rather just trade for my own account and not be bothered. I can also get rid of another sign on for TS which does cost me some fees for data feeds, but that is another issue.


Jimmy Tann

told you from day 1 lower the price and more people would join. That would of maybe encouraged you to keep going. Other creators take notice. If you want to boost your ego that’s fine, you will have to do it with no subscribers if you make the price too high.

Why would anyone subscribe to a system which has been in draw down for most of it’s short existence, it has nothing to do with the subscription fee, it has everything to do with a poor early track record. $100 a month is not too high for a good system, and $30 a month is too much for a poor system.