Top strategy. 100 sims…only 1 sub

TradeDetector: Top 1.3% of all C2 strategies. Ranked #11….100 Sims, only 1 subscriber. Makes you wonder what it takes to get subscribers?

40.4% DD is TOO HIGH!! - If I had $10,000 watching it sink to $6,000 is def gonna make me question the strategy. Realistically that needs to be <20% and the close to 10% the better.

1 Like

Takes either TOS and/or a lower DD and/or a longer track record.

But for highly risky systems like this, when you have no TOS, subscribers know you have zero skin in the game and can blow up, delete your profile, come on here with a new one, and start again, without any repercussions to you. :man_shrugging:

Good Point - True. If you have a higher Drawdown system it probably NEEDS to be TOS since it would reassure clients that the developers were ‘expecting’ this amount of ‘drawdown’ and its not just ‘losses’.

1 Like

No one should trade futures as a one and only investment vehicle. A Futures trading strategy should only be a small % of one’s overall investment portfolio. To trade TradeDetector, one should only invest about 10% of your overall total investment portfolio. Ex: if you have $250K total investment $, then you have $25K to put with the TradeDetecor trading strategy. A 40% draw on 10% of an overall $250K investment portfolio is only a 4% DD. Everyone seems ok with 4% DD with other investment vehicles vs one’s overall investment portfolio. DD is just that…. not a loss! As we all know, there is always more risk vs very high rewards when trading futures as proven by this TradeDetector strategy that now has a 260% return to date. You have to look at the risk vs reward vs your overall investment strategy. As with any futures trading strategy, the amount of investment $ invested in futures trading, should be considered $ you can afford to lose a 100% of.

Really? Who told you that ?

From way back when…trading futures should be part of an overall trading strategy……not an exclusive trading vehicle that you totally count on for investment.

If a trading system has an edge, why bother with stocks and bonds when the trader can use leverage in the futures/Forex market and make more money 5 or 10 times faster, using the same safe money management rules?

2 Likes

Futures don’t trade like stocks and bonds. Of course the reason is much higher volatility in future trading. Can’t use the same rules for Socks and bonds as you do futures. TradeDetector was created for the futures market. High DD is always a possibility in futures trading… but so is high returns. I will say this, the 40% DD was very early in the systems history. Hasn’t been anything even closel to that since.

3-year old C2 systems that outperform buy and hold with 10% drawdown or less do not exist on Collective2, traders can go to the Grid and verify that fact.

It is virtually impossible to beat the market for an extended period of time and still maintain 10% drawdown or less.

Thats why industry standard is 30%. I was just noting that makes 2X% systems very attractive. I’m just saying the closer to 10 the better (mid teens are superstars)

2 Likes

System A has a 12% annual return with 10% drawdown.
System B delivers a 48% annual return and its drawdown is 35%.

Believe it or not most traders would prefer to subscribe to system B, while system A will get little attention, if any.

Because all they notice is that system B is making 4 times more money than A, with a still reasonable drawdown.

Check in a month. I think at least one will exist. Not impossible.

2 Likes

I knew you would show up :grinning:
Yes your system may be the only exception.

1 Like

Do I qualify as a less risky system with decent returns? NQSniper

Yes. Nice Work Sniper. Now just need to combo NQSniper with Forex + S&P = Nice Triple Hedge

1 Like

My system Insights W1 has similar performance to your hypothetical "System B’ with 42% annual return and 24% drawdown. I run long-only stocks and the leverage averages less than 1. I have had it TOS for over a year. Yet it has had very few subscriptions. I am consistently in the top 10%, sometimes into the Top 10 based on C2’s ranking system which I feel does not give sufficient weight to Strategy Age and other more conservative metrics, causing system developers to design for max return and an expectation of blowup since they will attract more subscription revenue in the short term, and can start again without limitation.

I agree with your assessment on which systems draw the most subscriptions – a high return and a lot of hidden risk. Eventually, they do all tend to blow up at some point.

Your system does seem to have less risk than those that use a lot of leverage, but betting 25% of a portfolio on a single stock and holding overnight is not a strategy I would consider low-risk either. I do have your system on my watch list and may subscribe at some point, but probably at a pretty small allocation.

Gary

1 Like

I have a similar system, but it’s not that old. In addition, I have a low leverage system (max leverage < 2).
https://collective2.com/details/140535824
The other has a maximum leverage of 3.5-4 and is TOS.
https://collective2.com/details/140513127
The low leverage system has a much better C2 score (approx. rank 100), the TOS system is somewhere around rank 700. Although the same trades are always traded! Only 1.6% (+ leverage) is risked per trade. No hidden risk, but only one subscriber at the low leverage system :frowning:

I think many systems are under a year. Investors are looking for the stability.