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.

Is the market beatable with martingales?

Some time ago @integracore2 answered me that somewhere there are martingales that beat the market consistently.

Is this guy succeeding in it ?

1 Like

I believe my answer to this question then, was:

I can’t comment on FXShark unfortunately - what I can say is that the shape and dimensions of the Return/Risk chart are perfectly aligned with the DARWIN provider’s choice of username :wink:

1 Like

I would bet a martingale on DWC can work :wink:
The thing is getting interesting,
On 2y we have 40% return and 13% DD , numbers of a good system.
Rs is not so bad.
The traders is fully trusting his strategy with an equity >10k.

1 Like

It’s not martingale, it is grid trading. That’s not the same, but has a similar logic to add and add trades. It’s really interesting that the trader could manage it with success over years - after a huge DD.

There’s something most of us are yet to understand. When a trader trusts his system, he is not afraid to pump in his own money. And more importantly, a drawdown is not a loss until taken. Many traders cannot withstand the psychological effect of bad drawdown and that’s why I rank traders who have good capital base and has suffered some serious drawdowns high. When you know what you are doing, you can effectively manage a period of bad drawdown.
And more importantly, we shouldn’t be analysing the strategy of a trader based on what the attributes tell us. Believe me, there are many things a trader does that none of the attributes can quantify.


NMM was going to be my reply to this too. That went well… :joy:

1 Like

Ok but in this world 99.9% is fake, so blaming bad traders is too easy.
Witch hunting doesn’t pay.
Everyone of us wasted money with gambling or investing gamblers.
I am trying to keep a critic but constructive attitude.

NMM is a church for believers and not a Darwin

1 Like

I am quite impressed by the results of AOF .
I have always been very sceptical with grids and averaging down in general.

Let’s anayze the facts.
Return and DD on 2y are very similar to robust and good darwins.
Risk Stability score has grown by 2 points last year.
A score of 5.5 is impressive for this kind of trading.
There is a clear effort to stabilyze the system, which is also invested with a significant equity higher than 10k.
My sincere congratulations to @FXShark . :+1:


Are you serious ? Loss Aversion with regular extreme negative excursions proves that this strategy will fall down. You encourage this sort of GRID strategy, it is a shame !!

The trader can take this risk but not investors. Darwinex should prohibit this product in conversion into a Darwin, another NMM etc even of Rs is stabilized. Pfff


I don’t encourage nothing, or better… I encourage darwins that are beating the market for years.

I am not speaking about NMM , NMM never reached one year of trackrecord.
Letting loosers run forever isn’t a grid.

Loss Aversion is an important and interesting concept but the algo just measures the excursions of your trades.
Also intolerance to drawdown is a form of loss aversion.

1 Like

Revisiting a bit, the community found me with this interesting title. It is the winning market with martingales … All the traders are far from any involvement with this technique or swindle or final death … sword of damocles … And good I use a clear martingale technique, if I buy an asset and if It makes me more attractive I buy more … I rely on the price and the future of the transaction … I work with this discipline and until here … everything is to escape and run away from anything according to an investor who touch me
I remember some words from Warren Buffer … about your investment in value … if you allow me a literary license it would be something like … I invest in a company and if I go down I buy more … as long as the company gives me confidence.
You all look for great algorithms, expert mathematicians … great traders with methodologies that sometimes do not know what they mean … and we mistreat the martingales … from the ceo Juan Colon to the last merchant who wants to have investors … big or small returns are the ones that should mark the strategies … the approaches with martingale techniques … are not penalizable if they understand … play roulette … has no mystery … but understand that it will come out one of the 37 numbers that it contains … it can be an approximation … The markets are very corronpidos , many majors have cheated and some have had fines … And the culprits are the martingales? … Martingales are not bad … as long as they are part of a dynamic whole

1 Like

25% in 5 years can be satisfactory? With 38% DD ?
If you consider the central part we have 60% in 3 years so the illusion can last long.

Suppose I bought AOF when it was impressing in June 2018 .
I had suffered a loss of 30% and my investment would be still down by -20% after one year.

exactly what I’ve said for months if not years. I’ve got at least $75,000 total of my own capital behind a system I’ve designed similar to this one. I devised it completely in my own thinking and named it “grid lite”… at least 9 or 10 recoveries from high drawdown so far


The “problem” with martingale strategies is an obvious one, but very true though.

It works, until it doesn’t


5 posts were merged into an existing topic: Mql5,zulutrade,myfxbook etc,

Grids, Martingales, or combinations of both should be protected and made viable by good risk management plans. Period. Then they have a good opportunity to remain profitable.
See Frero:

or Blackwave Pacific:

from SimpleTrader who run variations of grids that work very well and are managed well.

2 poor examples which can be a fake or are still waiting for their death trade, or Both.

Against that stand millions of wiped out trading accounts of martingale and grid traders or their poor followers.


Is the market beatable with a Martingale? Yes, why not? Assuming you already have a trading system with a solid consistent edge, you could set a small enough starting risk size and a large enough start capitol and you could have only a small risk of catastrophe.

BUT is it optimal? Absolutely not. If you use the same solid consistent edge system but apply a non martingale money management you can expect to have better over-all return AND less over-all risk of catastrophe.

Is Martingale dangerous? It can be. A system with no edge that is expected to lose money over time can have it’s bad performance hidden for a long time in a positive looking P/L curve with Martingale MM. When analyzing the results of a system using Martingale MM we need much more data to even be able to tell if the system is profitable or not. Also, the risk of catastrophe can be deceptively high even when applied to a system with some edge (and if it’s somehow a smaller risk of catastrophe then your return will be suffering.) With martingale, you might get consistent stable (looking) weekly/daily returns but at the cost of more over-all risk. If you want the best over-all risk to return ratio Martingale is not it.