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.

IlIlIlIlI's demo portfolio

Darwins sold as they left the filter:

Performance fees are to pay for GSK and HEO.

Darwins bought for February:


HFD was sold as the max. DD increased 15.1 %.

Usually it would be banned for the next 2 years as it cannot meet the filter criteria.

Unfortunately Darwinex uses another DD calculation than real max. DD for filters so it is currently not shown because it does not meet the 5 % profit requirement in the last 6 months, but not because of violating the DD criteria.

It is replaced by WST, which meets all criteria and got 3 new investors last month.
(OOS - originally mentioned with 4 new investors - is already in the portfolio and locked his profit by correcting my wrong operation :slightly_smiling_face:)

February ended with acceptable losses:

The March setup will be done and published hopefully tomorrow


Gone because they didn’t meet the filter criteria or were sorted down by investor 1 month sort (LEN):

As there was not enough liquidity in the demo portfolio, I decided to buy only 4 new Darwins instead of cutting the existing positions. Position size was adjusted to $ 2,000 for each Darwin.

1 Like

The demo portfolio recovered fast to break even with the new setup:

1 Like

With 15% Stoploss I am certain no darwin will last for more than 4 months.
Grail performance exists only in the past, never in the future.
You are doing a kind of short term momentum investing, it could work but you need to find the right parameters.

The 15.1% SL is derived from the 15% max. DD of last 2 years of the filter. It does not make sense to hold a losing position until end f the month when the portfolio composition is renewed.

So I wonder whether most of the old Darwins cannot hold it while younger ones can. Luck or discipline? I watch that very closely and if I come to the decision that it is luck I would change my filter and of course the composition would change more to investors buy or sell behavior (only sort criteria) from a bigger number of eligible Darwins.

LUCK :slight_smile:

The only darwin with a long trackrecord that fulfills you low DD requirement is ERQ …
Low DD is not an indicator of discipline, the behaviour of the trader during DD is (loss aversion …var…)

1 Like

That’s not proved until now. :slightly_smiling_face:

SKI for example is also in the portfolio. There are more at the age of nearly 2 years.

Yes , a promising darwin, no 3 years of trackrecord neither 10 EX .
I don’t think @StokesBay can guarantee a DD lower than 15% , nobody can.

1 Like

No guarantees of course. But I think @StokesBay is on of the few traders trading metals with the necessary discipline to keep the DD low.

1 Like

SKI is the only darwin I Iike in your portfolio, others are unknown so likely to be lucky random guys.
@StokesBay is the only decent macro trader here.

1 Like

No, also LWE, the two current top performers are made by @StokesBay. :grinning:

1 Like

Agreed. I expect my DD to increase in this market. As volatility increases I am expecting a higher DD at some point over the coming months. I am not reducing position size however since it is this negative macro scenario that I have been positioning for.

If investors do not want to experience high DD then they need to reduce their position size.


to be fair they are highly correlated since both have long gold as their core holding. you are effectively doubling up and getting very little diversification holding both of these


As long as both make profit it’s wanted. :wink:

Seriously: it is just the result of the filter and my rules. There are not enough Darwins in the result to add further selections. Before I look at the trader I would like to add a rule that the Darwin must be published longer than 1 year, but currently I can’t.

Maybe because you requirements are unrealistic and produce only short and lucky trackreckords.
You assume that darwins shoud produce 20% annualized with 10% DD.
Unfortunatelly the reality is closer to 10% annualized with 20% DD.

We will see. Currently the portfolio shows 0.7% gross profit after some days more than 2 months which is much better than some frequently discussed heroes can show in 2020. :wink:

Yes it depends on the the definition of heroes…
My heroes with realistic past DD and long trackrecord are doing very well:
WFJ +10%
ULI +12%
not to speak about PLF and UYZ …


Two out of …?

I think the discussion about most of your favorites is very calm in 2020.