I was not about to reply to the questions (or scoffs) from some traders, as their questions were already answered in this thread or my community posts a long long time ago. However, fellow traders (@CavaliereVerde @integracore2 @SkyField ) have expressed their support for ERQ, which I am grateful for. I think that I need to write a response to make things clearer.
I opened a trading account with Darwinex in the year of 2014 when Darwinex just started to accept customers. In the first month, I read every sentence of the help section to understand how Darwinex works. And I read every blog post about updates and changes as soon as they were published. I wrote to Darwinex if I had any questions. I reported a bug to Darwinex in early 2015 (so Friday closes 5 minutes before 5pm NY time). If you want to manage a DARWIN, you HAVE TO learn Darwinex system as much as you can. In reply to BenHardy's question (https://community.darwinex.com/t/erq-oakladder/231/34) , I said 'I think that no one can manipulate it (Darwinex system)'. If someone thinks that some traders take advantage of Darwinex system, please show us how they did it, why he is not doing it, or if he is doing it, how much performance fees he has earned.
As for the low return of the underlying strategy of ERQ, I replied to the same question from ForexGhost on Twitter in July 2016. Unfortunately I could not find ForexGhost's tweet. I expect the same question coming from someone else in the year of 2022.
The low VaR of the underlying strategy is not deliberately set by me. In the first half of 2015, the VaR was around 4% and the account balance was about 4000 USD. If you read the earlier posts in this thread, you would find more discussions about the VaR.
The most important thing for me is to limit the drawdown of my Darwin. My trading system was designed to trade smaller size to control the drawdown if loss happened, which naturally caused lower and lower VaR. Besides, markets have changed a lot for the past 4 years, so I have to make adjustments to my trading system (such as trading frequency and duration) which could also affect the VaR. I have been trying to increase the VaR, but I have to always consider the possible drawdown of Dawin. I spoken to several management members of Darwinex about increasing the VaR of my strategy in 2017. I suggested that Darwinex set a VaR floor for all strategies in 2016.
The reason I want to increase the VaR is that higher VaR will allow me to use multiple orders for a setup which means a much larger capacity. I have changed my trading style a little in order to increase the VaR while managing the drawdown of the Darwin. The VaR has been increased since last September. If someone ever knows how hard I tried to increase the VaR while managing the drawdown of the Darwin, he would not laugh at the low VaR and how little I risk in my underlying strategy.
I hope that the VaR of the underlying strategy will reach my goal by the end of this year. Then I will set a much higher maximum amount of investor capital. Currently it is set at 700 K USD and ERQ is not open for new investments, even though the divergence has fallen to -0.04%. I have always put the safety of investor capital first. Unless I am sure that ERQ can handle a larger amount without divergence, I will not change the maximum amount of investor capital. I do not think that any scammer trader would refuse to accept new investments for his Darwin in a similar situation.
Regarding the performance fees generated from DarwinIA allocation, I bet that there are at least five DARWINs that earned less total performance fees than ERQ but more DarwinIA performance fees than ERQ. And I have not won any DarwinIA allocation for many many months. The most aggressive promoter in this community, please do not chase after me.
Thank you all!