CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 66 % of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.

Darwinex Filters: Under The Radar

Hi guys!

As you’ve discovered in your interface yesterday, a new predefined filter has been released: Under The Radar!

Our latest dedicated blog post will tell you more about it!

https://blog.darwinex.com/new-filter-under-the-radar-darwins/

I open a separated thread from the original (you can find here) because, if predefinded filters are helpful to reduce our playing field and sort roughly in the first place, this one enters in a category I would personally call: Advanced predefined filters. A more subtle level.

Taking into account scalability, it becomes not only a simple filter, but a management tool as itself.

In my view, we are not talking anymore about just sorting and maintaining a basket of quality (criterias x or y) DARWINs, but about performance optimization, definitely love that (and will make some experiments hehe :nerd:)!!

just thinking out loud… What about a portfolio with:

  • 33% to 50% of Under The Radars DARWINs
  • we take only the best D-Scores to reach our 33 - 50%

… … interesting :thinking:

6 Likes

I think this filter could be investable “as is”.
Beware of chasing too high DScore, often it means buying above average stuff. :wink:

If someone has a free demo (I don’t) :smiley: it would be worth tracking this filter with a weekly update.

2 Likes

I can run, it,
let’s define the parameters for the portfolio, and go! :slight_smile:

allocation: 100% of Under The Radar?
numbers: 5, 10, 20? more?
timeframe for a review: week, month, quarter?

2 Likes

I would pick everyone ~30
100x2 per darwin is quite cheap also for a live portfolio.

If a weekly review is too challenging you can sell & rebuy once per month as suggested by @Pulse07.

Portfolio by Pulse07

1 Like

OK let’s run that starting from next week.
This way we have some time to setup the thing properly.

Review the portfolio once a week is doable.

So I propose to review once a week the filter, on this basis:

  • exit on those who are not anymore
  • acquire on the Monday every new asset in the filter on Friday.
  • keep on open investments (not sell-rebuy to avoid slippage) on those who stays unchanged

Question: Do we add any timing methodology?
Drawdown, dip in the D-Score, buy limit in %, etc…

Perhaps let’s do a passive portfolio first, then add timing if we spot that the thing can be otpimized :wink:

your thoughts?

4 Likes

I think that if you trust the filter and buy all the 30 darwin at once timing is not necessary, some entries will be good some other bad but on average you will benefit from the power of the selection criterias.

1 Like

I had chosen to sell and rebuy every month because it allowed me to compose my portfolio quickly without having to check which darwins came in or out.
Especially for the divergence because there is no filter for this, the alert message at the time of purchase told me simply that I did not have to buy this darwin because the divergence was too high…
But it turns out that it is too expensive.
Every month the portfolio loses between 0.1 and 0.3% when I renew it.
I did not think it would have such a big impact, I will do otherwise from next month.

2 Likes

GREAT, let’s do it! :+1:

1 Like

Probably sell & rebuy once per month is too much but it is good to do that maybe every 6 months to:

  • rebalance investments
  • re-leverage the open profit
1 Like

will try to do my best to not enter like an elephant :wink:

1 Like

Best timing could be sell and rebuy immediately after paying investor fees. If the Darwin shows losses it could be contra productive.

2 Likes

Six months are 2 quarters so it is feasible.
What really matters is that criteria are right and you are on the good ones.

If you are on the right ones after 6m there shoud be at least 10% of open profit to re-leverage and redistribute.

Indeed. If rebalancing allocation in between investor fees natural payments (quarters), then you’d want to focus on moving only the minimal excess investment required for the re-allocation, not more, in order to stay reinvested the most and not seal HMW too early on larger amounts
Keeping track of this organization over time could become quite complex and require close monitoring. At times, you might also hit the minimal additional investment threshold ($20) pushing you to manipulate slightly more money than needed

edit : what I prefer about this new filter is that it replaces the “most invested” one as primary display on the explorer. Time to give some love to the dark side of the place

1 Like