The procedure of rescale is a great disappointment

C2
1

Due to the rapid growth of the accounts of my strategy for Alpha and Omega, I made a rescale strategy this Saturday 8 April.


Here’s how it was before rescale (option “Typical Broker Commissions and Fees”):
befor-rescale6.png924×633 35.3 KB

And here is how it became after reschale:
after--rescale.png959×710 43.8 KB

In the description it is said that “Cumul. Return” will fall a little, as the subscription fee remains the same, and the account size decreases. It is reasonable. I revived the fall of “Cumul. Return” by 1-2%. But not twice.

I had a maximum drawdown of 20.2%. After the rescale was 61.9%. This is absurd. After numerous calls to the support service, it became 39.7%. This is less important. But still not true.

Now “Cumul. Return” has grown, but due to trade on Monday and Tuesday.

My “Cumul. Return” should now be about 490-500%. Look at my strategy with the option “OpenECry Commissions and Fees” or “Interactive Brokers Commissions and Fees”.

Even the option “Daniels Trading Commissions and Fees” - the worst possible - is still much better than the current indicators.

And a big problem for me in two things:

  1. the maximum drawdown is greater than it actually was.
  2. In all selections (The Grid, Leader Board , and so on), “Cumul. Return” is used from the “Typical Broker Commissions and Fees” option - and I was significantly spoiled by statistics.

I appeal to the administration of C2:
Please solve the problem.
Do a recount of the statistics from the start of my strategy until April 7.
Bidding for 10 and 11 April, you do not need to scale anymore, since they are traded after scaling.

Many thanks.

2

All the reports of rescaling I’ve seen have been negative.

1 Like
3

it’s ok people have seen the old chart. just keep up the good work.

4

No, I do not agree with you.
This is not ok.
You are a regular, you are here all the time.
Have you seen.

But people who go to C2 time from time will use selection systems. For example, the grid will be selected: maximum drawdown <30%. And they will not see me.

Or with such parameters C2 will not be my strategy to show in Leader Board, etc.

I want to trade well and attract many subscribers. The fact that you are my subscriber is excellent, I am sincerely happy about this. But I want more people to see my strategy.

Now it turns out that C2 spoils my statistics and then because of this will not show on important places. It’s not fair.

5

I’m sorry I did not read about this earlier.

6

Matthew, please fix this for him. also please answer my question on the other post.

7

Send your question to help desk.

1 Like
8

Well, you know, those hypothetical results and data manipulations such as scaling have both positive and negative aspects.

If most of the subscribers use Interactive Brokers, and in your virtual trades you benefited from the unrealistic $1,400 margin / contract requirement, then the displayed “results” are in any case much better than those subscribers could get.

Regarding rescaling - I am not familiar with the way C2 do it, but if you start with 1 contract and increase the position to 70, then naturally this kind of trading cannot be scaled down proportionally without significantly affecting the results.

As we have seen in other cases, when the trades are virtual (before there are any auto-traders, and when the system isn’t TOS), the equity curve is questionable, with or without scaling.

Even with auto-traders, I wonder how does C2 determine the average execution price when some subs get margin calls during the trade and have their positions closed by the broker while others don’t.

9

Of course I did it.
And not once.

10

I see now the glitch have been removed and the max dd is 37% , whats the problem ?

11

Read the first post in this discussion.
Everything is written there in detail. And about the maximum drawdown, too.

There are even pictures to make it easier for you to understand.

12

The problem seems to be a very temporary spike. If they reported MAX end-of-day drawdowns (instead of intraday drawdowns), then the spike would not matter at all.

Why did the spike occur? Was there extreme leverage, or was there a glitch that created a spike that never occurred?

1 Like
13

They removed the spike already .

14

Thanks, I didn’t realize that.

15

On the pictures there is a vertical scale (money).
Look at the graph and the numbers in the second picture. A spike was drawn. And I was removed and left $ 25,000 in my account. And it was necessary to increase the entire schedule to $ 50,000. Evenly according to my transactions.

16

I think you are worrying over nothing the typical commissions applies site wide not just to your system , and surely when you rescale a system down DD will be affected differently by your monthly fees .

Anyway i think you should worry about your martingale strategy , its just matter f time and your max DD will exceed 50% so this discussion here will sound silly and funny .

Look at this trade you held a daytrading position and et it wipe 19% of your account before it came back into the black . Thats what you should worry about , surely your max DD isnt going to stop here at 38% .

1 Like
17

I had an account of $ 250,000 and I did a 19% rescale. That is, reduced the account 5 times. In the end, I had to get $ 50,000.
Instead, I got $ 25,000.

Thus, I was reduced to “Cumul. Return” twice.

18

chart looks good now. Actually the lower price makes the system more attractive to people with smaller accounts.

19

Let me take care of my trade, not you.
Thank you.

Do not clutter up the topic.

20

The graph should look like it now looks with the option “OpenECry Commissions and Fees” or “MB Trading Commissions and Fees” or "Daniels Trading Commissions and Fees"
And the maximum drawdown is 20%.

And an amazing thing. On the chart, I have $ 34,585 available, but in statistics $ 61,229 and I can actually trade at $ 61,229.
This can also mislead people.