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 ?!

This brings in the Capacity concept. Providers who have reached capacity will want to increase fee % but those who have not and will be incentivised to reduce fees until they reach capacity.

It’s trying to maximise performance fees which in turn will attract more providers and in turn more investors.

Perhaps investor money is stagnant due to a lack of providers/quality Darwins???

1 Like

And this is an example of foggy marketing maneuvers.
Now those with more AUM are better at trading not at marketing.
When the rules are simple, clear and same for everyone is more difficult to manipulate investors.


Darwin was born as an evolution of PAMM , something better for investors.
If some genius-trader prefer the PAMM they are free to leave.
I hope that Darwinex won’t ruin the genial concept of the darwin to please someone.


Yes, that´s truth. I guess it is what is going to happen as soon as other broker take the torch Darwinex started with. Nowadays, Darwinex is not the same it used to be anymore.

I disagree. The problem is not the amount or the percentage. The problem is the quality of providers. If darwins don´t make profits it doesn´t matter the amounts.
I said and I repeat it again. Darwinex is promoting Darwinia the wrong way. They are rewarding high monthly returns while they should look for a monthly contest rewarding a longer period of time ( last 3 or 6 months averaged) and EX should not have any weight (promising darwins had an opportunity if they show good several months trading, instead going crazy behind absurd monthly perfomance) so providers start focusing on a medium and long term times. When you reward a 30 days job…what do you expect the provider (many of them) focus on? Short term is the answer. Also you are promoting farming.
At the end, they are collecting what they are focus on…quantity instead quality…it means more money for Darwinex…money talks. More of the same.


Maybe the period over which performance fees are assessed should be adjusted.

A provider charging 20% is assessed over 3m period.
A provider charging 10% is assessed over 1m period
A provider charging 30% is assessed over 6m period.

This would reduce the risk someone is ‘conned’ into a poor Darwin and suffers excessive fees.

If a provider wants to charge 30% he will need to be patient and confident in his Darwin/performance over a longer time period.

1 Like

This is interesting but… complicated… :slight_smile:
Why to complicate a simple thing that works?


works for who?
bringing flexibility is simply trying to maximise benefits (hopefully to all if well designed)

1 Like

This. I already decreased my exposure on Darwinex substantially and invested it somewhere else after realising that my actual paid performance fees are more like >35% due to some Darwins crashing after a while. And I actually think this is a very good ratio on Darwinex. I can’t imagine investing in a Darwin requesting more than 20%. It’s just not worth a higher risk that I already take.

1 Like

This is Commission structure for our HFD elsewhere.Before some people go ballistic,he had 215% profit during the year without Risk manager interfering.

1 Like

Wowww…I understand HFD wants more money for its job, and maybe he should leve Darwinex, but Darwinex can not make rules to please one or a few traders…I guess.
They should take care of the majority of providers and investors. IMO is better a fixed rate. I think 20% is very reasonable and competitive fee.


HFD arrived “yesterday”, where talent ends ant luck begins?
I dont’ know, but thera are many other good darwins.
I know that there are also providers that would prefer managment fees instead of performance fees. IMO management fees are a bullshit of the world of the funds, something that Darwinex is trying to overcome.
If you are a skilled trader and you come to Darwinex you accept the rules of Darwinex, that are different from Alpari or eToro, nobody is so important or indispensble to impose his rules.


Darwinex is acting here preemptively.They are in this business to make money and they will bend any rule they think will bring more money to themselves.Darwinia is clear example,as we found during our debate.Migrations are second example.Swaps are third example,late addition and heavy weight of Mc attribute is fourth example…


If I were investing on AlpariPAMM and every manager requierd 50k for 20% I would need 1 million to have a portfolio of 20 funds like mine, ridiculous…
Bruce Kovner was asking 50%, not with 2 years of trackrecord…
Good bye to diversification… :smiley:
I would probably stay on demo for 2 or 3 years, so a lot of demo fees for managers and demo commissions for the broker…:smile_cat:

1 Like

An excellent trader… But the 200+% was with 40% VAR or so…

See how he reduced risk even further since becoming popular on Darwinex and amassed AUM? I am willing to bet that he will never have a 20% losing month on Darwinex again.

That’s the benefit of the Darwinex message.

“Trade with minimal risk, attract AUM to be able to live off that minimal risk, charge the professional 20% fee.”

Investors get to enjoy diversification too.

Feels like some of these messages are being overwritten these days. Started with the deposit requirements for Darwinia which cancelled out the message of " a level playing field for everyone big and small".

With that payment plan, small time investors, which are the bulk of the population here will find it hard.

N:B. I don’t have any issues with Darwinex becoming a free for all war zone like other PAMM sites. It’s just that I tend to feel bad when I become a fanboy and get disappointed by changes to the core product I am stanning :expressionless::expressionless:


I am not quant and don’t really know.If it helps you,he was at 25% real DD and double the average leverage as here.

To be fair to Darwinex, hedge funds tailor their product in terms of VAR and fees to their clients dependent on their risk profile and size.

Here Darwinex is trying to provide a hedge fund as a service to providers.

Okay so this change would benefit providers and perhaps is not done with investors first in mind - though I do think some providers will lower their fees. But, investors are not tied for any period, they can move their capital at will.

Perhaps if investors commit their capital for a minimum period they could be rewarded with lower fees.

So @bianka can I suggest:

  • flexible VAR set by investor
  • investment period set by investor (commitment of x capital for y period)
  • % performance fee set by provider (determines period of performance fee assessment set by Darwinex)

I don´t think so, it will benefit only to a few providers. So investors wil have to choose if they want to pay higher fees th darwins like HFD or less fees to the averaged Darwin.
I think darwins like HFD should be thankful to Darwinex for the opportunity and the exposure.when he is not even a native darwin.

1 Like

Should Messi be also thankful to Barca or should Barca be happy to have Messi and keep him?
Should Messi be payed the average salary at Barca?

Why are so many beating up on HFD? It hasn’t even reached Capacity yet - in fact it is circa 5m below. Raising % fees for them will likely lead to lower AUM and potentially lower fees.

Bith, but Messi should be the first one. Barca brought him at 12 to help him with a medical treatment, also gave his father a job…the outcome could have been very different if Messy didn’t become a great player. But the help he received from Barca was done anyway. Afterwards Messi has been loyal to who helped him and his family when he was nobody. Bravo for Messi and Barca.