CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. -- % 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.

Darwins / signal copy reality

Are there any plans to do like etoro has, that you can invest in a portfolio manager?
i.e. not just traders but people who actively trade the darwins and index those?

Here is my portfolio so far… still above water just. Not quite a Vanguard yet.

1 Like

aaaaaaaaaand the bulk all died… Wonder what the main strategies are using underneath as they all died at the same time… (this week)…

3 Likes

update - wheels coming off.
It really is striking how similar two darwins are - especially what HFD is going through atm - I wonder what they are trading underneath? BTFD in US indices? (you can see indices have stalled…)

1 Like

Konstantin is (HFD) as recommended by Juan above https://www.darwinex.com/darwin/HFD.4.17

Konstantin says this is down to EURUSD/GOLD - (I would have said BTFD on indices coming to an end…) but he says he is FX/Gold etc. using futures & options analysis.

he says its a “semi automated systems known within certain circles” - anyone know what that is?

Its interesting this drawdown right now - it is remarkably similar to other EAs that are going through the same drawdown and being marketed online as signals/investment ops - is it a common EA? I don’t keep up to date on EA’s as they are mostly garbage… but there seems to me commonalities around.

Signal providers with incredible results are probably not that good; Reality is more moderate and especially long-term. Good accounts don’t attract attention.

On the other hand, immature retail investors are also not prepared for the truth, they panic to a drawdown and complain when profitability is not astronomical.

5 Likes

What Konstantin has written to date doesn’t explain this, the current threads full of people posting on his behalf don’t explain it either.

There are 2 discussions active on it atm - my thread was timely.


the first circled DD on the left of chart is 7% Drawdown and the 2nd last circled DD in sept 19 was 8.9% drawdown.

you are reading the chart incorrectly

I am not.

thanks.

- Circle 1,2,3,4,5,6 show rapid rebounds - that is not normal, this is every dip. That is martingale-esque.
- Last square is the drawdown - in the context of what Konstantin has told us “how” he trades - this is very wrong - there is something else going on here.

It look very similar to an EA that other companies / people are using to sell investment/services.

1 Like

Any type DD recovery pattern where the DD quickly “snaps back” again and again combined with a D-leverage increase at every trough could mean adding more and more to positions, holding losses longer and longer and or trading more and more frequently during DD periods. All of which are forms of an increase to risk to subsidize a speedier recovery out of DD. (BTW, employing such a recovery technique increases long-term risk over-all vs. any given over-all expected long-term reward/return. Not to mention is EXTRA likely to have much larger intra-day DD spikes than the Darwinex stats are showing because DD data at Darwinex is currently recorded as infrequently as once per day to once every six hours.)

To be fair though, any excellent trader who is masterfully scaling in only when trades move against her original position would have have a similar pattern. I think properly scaling in would have some leverage spikes at troughs and the ones that she got stopped out on then might have a flat period while she patiently waited for another high probability trade then she would start small again with small leverage (even though she may be deep in DD.)

2 Likes

loving the steady queue of people trying to educated others on this forum - it’s cute.

I do not know about the EA, but I totally agree about the abnormal dip and rebound on the equity curve.

“I do not know about the EA, but I totally agree about the abnormal dip and rebound on the equity curve.”

yes EA is conspiracy of course, the chart tells us enough… :slight_smile:

Dear @pecuniafactorem - Firstly, sorry that I’ve been so absent from the forum lately. I have every intention of dropping by on a weekly basis - hope I can build the habit.

Secondly, there’s a few points that can help here:

On the point of “martin-galesque” there’s no need to hypothesise - the whole thing is plotted on the second curve. On first sight, I haven’t seen behaviour different from previous instances.

Thirdly, on the point that I recommended HFD. This is an area on which I personally have to thread very carefully. I’m engaging in direct conversation with you guys on the forum because I think it’s the right thing to do, and I have every intention to continue prioritising this over other items. But I’m a human being like you guys, and I make mistakes all the time :slight_smile:

Konstantin hasn’t promised any returns to anyone, and every investor in HFD has all the above statistics to inform them + Konstantin does his best in providing disclosure on the different threads. Whether or not our (Darwinex’s) or his (Konstantin’s) is good enough is in the eye of the beholder. There’s MANY things we need to improve, and every constructive feedback is taken very seriously.

There are limiting factors here:

  • Darwinex has provided the same disclosure before and after the drawdown. The D-Leverage plot was there for everyone to see, and so was the Rs grade.
  • Konstantin didn’t encourage to lever up from 10% - we’re called Darwin Exchange (as opposed to e.g. Winnie The Pooh-Nex) because we do our best in providing disclosure and curation (risk-management), and thereafter it’s survival of the fittest on both the manager and the investor side.

On that note, if you ever feel that I personally endorse HFD in my current capacity as company CEO, please call me out immediately, because I shouldn’t. Our Exchange Ethos is incompatible with our publicly endorsing any provider - be they tall / short / profitable / unprofitable etc. We have to respect absolute neutrality.

Having said that, I am a person and a user of our product, and all I can say from that standpoint (that of a fellow long time user of the service) is that I personally haven’t sold my HFD investment. I look forward to receiving your thoughts on the above, and will do my best to clarify any misunderstandings.

Thanks for engaging with us either way!

7 Likes

@pecuniafactorem here I come again :slight_smile:

My personal codename for DARWIN portfolios is Mendels -> DARWIN proved evolution by natural selection, and Mendel through genetic engineering -> thus the analogy with what’s effectively a fund of funds.

It is technically possible to replicate another investors’ portfolio. We have implemented the solution for a couple of professional asset managers managing DARWIN portfolios on behalf of clients. Before we release the functionality, we’re working on several initiatives:

  • Rolling out non mean-reverting, beta carrying assets -> stocks etc.
  • A re-alignment of our investor business model with our vision, which we plan to complete in 2020
  • A review of the manager compensation model to overcome what we call “the diversification curse”. Imagine an investor in a hypothetical portfolio with 2 managers, 50% pro-rata allocation of 100 bucks where DARWIN A makes e.g. 10% and DARWIN B loses 10% would end up the quarter 1% down at 99 -> losing on account of the performance fees paid to the winner, which weren’t re-couped by the loser.
  • A business model which aligns Mendel investors with Mendel & underlying DARWIN managers
  • A market for capacity rights (Tinder for DARWIN managers and DARWIN investors, including Mendel managers). One issue that currently penalises our model is the high water mark and many investors’ gift for “buying the highs and selling the lows”, which results in capacity misallocation
  • Deciding on whether or not we’re willing to extend the regulatory umbrella afforded by our asset manager to Mendel managers.

So, the answer is - YES, we have every intention to power that model. But as you’ll gather from the above, many milestones before we release the existing Alpha functionality to the public. Happy to cover any questions!

7 Likes

You did as above… 28th Jan and you have just done it again here declaring holding onto a holding.

I have specifically referenced HFD subsequent to that as my post was very timely - HFD has dropped from +206% to 151%.

The point I made was that I selected a diversified portfolio. For ~6 months work it is underwater at ~1% - obviously I can get more in a bank at 0.0000% interest.
I had setup accounts on the main signal trading sites to compare whats what before I invest with any of them hence my post.

Re: the data - unfortunately having seen both sides (I trade on Darwinex and setup a Darwin “ONO” to test my assumptions) unless I had the raw data in front of me I wouldn’t stamp approval on it.

I don’t want to get into a bun fight on this - I am just saying what I see as a customer that I wouldn’t invest at present. Ultimately - if I am thinking it, your potential customers will be thinking it too, the HFD DD will be a factor and can obvioulsy be damaging to a great company.
I am a big fan of Darwinex and I recommend you to anyone and everyone who I speak to as #1.
I get a commission rebate, I get FSCS protection, I get insurance and I get a properly FCA regulated company.

The second part to that was stating that many of the social trading sites are clearly running martingales or dubious stats given we now know MT4 is being gamed across the industry by people with access to broker servers - obvioulsy that isn’t the case here, as you run your own book.
Hence my impression the reality of retail trading is, it is far more sobering than anyone realises and not many are making consistent profits at all.

1 Like

@pecuniafactorem I think the reality of trading (retail or otherwise) is that few people make consistent profits at all. Our approach to this is be 100% transparent about it -> the only way to make the winners credible is to publish THE WHOLE THING - including both the winners and the losers.

In other words, the losing majority is what makes the winners credible. That’s why we’re called Darwinex :slight_smile:

On the subject of trader performance - Darwinex is a 2-sided marketplace. And this has a HUGE:

All of Darwinex is built on the premise that Alpha exists, and that if you offer talent the best deal, they will choose to market through you. All we’re doing here is walking our own talk. We may privately (I’m talking with my personal Juan the user hat) agree or disagree whether our existing manager pool is good enough, but what I can tell you is that 2 years ago everyone’s investment results would have been substantially worse than today, and that more and more people are doing better and better, on both sides of the equation.

7 Likes

yep.

let us know when the Darwin Investment Portfolio Manager thing is up - we will be all over that.

2 Likes

image

Not martingale/grid?

1 Like

@pecuniafactorem
Next time put a little more meat on the bone.Here,I fixed it for you:

You might also check a thread that also contains your posts and maybe you overlooked it:
https://community.darwinex.com/t/hfd-in-drawdown-what-do-you-think-about-it/7223

2 Likes

You seem pretty animated seeetpea.

What are you trying to show me / what is your point?