Why the max drawdown changes

Bijagual, used to have 73% max drawdown. The number is 66% now. What is going on?

Hi, Tao:

The Trade Leader shut down his strategy, and in doing so, changed his “Monthly Subscription Price” to $0.

Because C2 incorporates the current monthly subscription price into the trade results, the equity curve displayed can change when the Trade Leader lowers or raises his fees.

The max drawdown period goes from 7/5/17 to 9/8/17 with an equity of about $55.7K on 7/5/17. The difference between 73% and 66.7% DD on $55.7K is about $3.5K which does not accurately reflect the last (and presumably highest) subscription rate charged of $595/mo. since the DD period was just over 2 months and even if 3 months is used it’s off.

And should we conclude that the Trade Leader was charging $595/mo in the early days of the strategy when his fees were lower even earlier in 2018? Unless you have information the subscription was significantly higher than $595 during the DD period, this doesn’t appear to add up.

C2 strategy page information indicates that the Trade Leader has capped the maximum number of subscribers, which reads much differently than shutting down the strategy for all. If he hasn’t shut down for his existing subscribers, why should we conclude that he is now charging them $0 and not his last shown subscription fees? And finally, why should a change of fees in 12/18 alter the entire equity chart and DD when subscription fees were charged from 1/17-12/18 and these had previously been accounted for? Why alter the DD and equity chart retroactively?

That is too bad. I found myself cheering for him and his subscribers from time to time. The equity curve is breath taking, reminds me of “Shadowbanker” from a few years ago.

If the fund size changes, the drawdown shouldn’t change. AM I right?

The Model Account size didn’t change. The subscription fee changed. This changed the cumulative returns over time.