CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 64 % 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.

Flexible fees ?!

Could you explain what does it mean (what is in bold) ¨ Dar al gestor flexibilidad : que pueda personalizar el gestor de riesgo dejando el nivel de riesgo a su elección y que pueda elegir también los precios a cobrar al inversor.
I hope it doesn´t imply that every manager can charge any fee instead the 20% fixed, it´d be a cannibal jungle…

4 Likes

@Forexintradiadarwin It was like that at Alpari Pamm.Usually small investors had to pay between 33 and 50%(no kidding) and bigger investors something like 15-30% .Vast majority was paying 35-50%,but profits were much bigger and tax-free.
Darwinex is probably trying to retain people like HFD with such move,so enjoy your 20% Performance fee while it lasts.

1 Like

If brainless investors are willing to pay those fees…
The good of Darwinex is that there are no privileged conditions for presumed geniuses.
20% on performance is the standard for hedge funds, nothing new, we have to look to hedge funds not to PAMMs.
If PAMMs were so good for investors there would be no need for Darwins.

2 Likes

Flexibility is to allow the risk manager to work better not to customize fees.

1 Like

From the trader side if it becomes true, that´s great…the investors will be piss off…
In this particular case I am fan of a fixed fee rated to prevent prostitution and cannibalism.

3 Likes

The traditional standard for hedge funds 2/20. 20% performance fee, but also a 2% AuM yearly fee. I wonder if they are also considering providing the option of including an AuM componente into the fee structure options…

1 Like

Pay ATTENTION to second part of the phrase (I am going to translate the statement above):

¨Give flexibility to the manager: so the manager can customize the risk manager at its choice, AND he can also CHOOSE the FEES to charge the investor¨

2 Likes

If they will do in that way it will be the end of the Darwin concept, It will become the same jungle as PAMMs.

3 Likes

Yes, I agree, that´s the reason I asked for a clarification.

1 Like

So the new sport will be winning DarwinIA and then switching the fee to 100% because the allocation lasts for three months?

Or is it just me getting sarcastic because they will only allow to set the investor fees, not the darwinia allocation fee.

2 Likes

Why? The negative is not clear to me. I agree with you there is an issue around investors knowing the returns they will get for the price - they never will know - but what is the benefit of a pre-determined fee set by a third party to buyer and seller?

Providers have all the advantages and almost no disadvantages.
You can have one profitable darwin and 9 losers and still make money with the winner.
As investor if 10% of your portfolio is a loser you dont’ make moeny.

I just present my case: 20k earnings as provider, -3k as investor and I think to be an expert investor…
The situation is already very unbalanced for traders…

2 Likes

But isn’t that just buyer beware? The Dscore needs to be as good as it can be.

Why is there no incentive for providers to reduce fees to increase AUM?

1 Like

Because providers are not regulated by a license.
Often they are guys that want to impress noobs and believers with a strategy doomed to crash after few months so they would set an insane fee to squeeze investors before the crash.
Scammers would use flexible risk and flexible fees to confuse investors, it is happening on every PAMM … a total mess and a total bullshit…

5 Likes

This would be a really really horrible move if that’s what will happen. It would be as bad as cancelling the Darwinia.

It’s funny how they are ignoring some of the more astute suggestions for more brazen changes. Once people can choose what to charge and fix risk for themselves, its basically just another PAMM site.

I supported the flexible VAR move because I thought it would be a uniform change affecting all darwins. If it will be at the discretion of the provider… Not good.

4 Likes

One of the reason that here we have traders that are also investors (like me :slight_smile: ) is that fees are fair and clear, no strange plans set by marketers.
If this balance moves to favor providers there will be no reason for traders to invest.

2 Likes

20% is enough. They don’t need to bend over for anyone. HFD has almost $4m. If he needs to charge higher fees, he can manage other accounts outside Darwinex.

Why bend the rules to impress less than 0.01% of the population? The investor money has been stagnant for a while, I don’t see how this would make them happy.

Anyway, they know best. Those favoured will stay, others will leave. Going to be sad though because after all the talk and promise, looks like it will be more of the same.

6 Likes

Exactly… People like you will just have to trade your money… I also wonder how it would affect investor profits. Imagine a trader charging 20% during a drawdown and then taking it up to 35% during favorable conditions.

People,it seems everybody overlooked my last sentence in my first post.That is reality.Darwinex is not government to force somebody to stay if he gets better deal elsewhere.
Secondly,fees can also go bellow 20% temporarily to attract first investors.It is better to collect 12% on 300k than 20% on 50k AuM.

1 Like

Again, one thing I have seen on PAMM sites where these rules are applicable is excessive risk as people chase commissions… A trader with very few investors will take very high risk to make the most of them. Darwinex has been trying hard to make this a low risk environment. Once you allow people charge whatever they like, there will be more 50%+ months and obviously -50%+ months as well. Even the risk engine won’t help at that point.

Anyway I think investors should be the ones talking about this change the most.

1 Like