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.

JHU - Unofficial Discussion

Another perfect migration. One to watch

50K investment straight off the bat.

NIght scalper with 170k capacity , which is probably generous.


1 Like

I don’t have nothing against scalpers but a Capacity of 0.4 is really too low.
Divergence of -0.3% with only 50k of AUM…:thinking:
Sharing this kind of strategy does not make much sense.


investing in it, doesn’t make much sense either .


@Muiris @Tomcat @IlIlIlIlI
Here we have the main proplem of the “most investors” filter.
A herd attracted by a recent migration.

1 Like

True, I’m bit astounded by this one.

there has been some other hero migrations lately that didn’t get traction.

1 Like

There is nothing bad in the strategy and trading capital is decent.
We need more public trackrecord to exclude a lucky account from a trackrecord farm.

OS 9
LA 4
This means a contrarian entry that helps with Divergence and Capacity.

Trading journal is perfect and consistent with the description: night scalping without grid or averaging.

BTW the herd doesn’t care about this stuff, they see only Return and DD. :smiley:

Sorry,I don’t take migrations seriously without at least 360 days of trading at Darwinex after migration.

1 Like

I require 750 :slight_smile:
but for 50 noobs a couple of weeks is enough.

JHU is not investable but promising, maybe it will be the next SKJ

1 Like

Maybe @jhui could write here and explain us if holding long positions on spx500 for more than one week has to be considered night scalping .

Can you find me a non offensive word to define this?

1 Like

dead vampire scalping - made by a liar?

1 Like

Considering the tone of this reply, I’d like to invite you to read again our community guidelines. Please think about whether this reply improves the conversation on this forum or not.


What @bianka said :+1:

We’re trying very hard to keep the forum a place where civil, serious, professional conversations are held.

There is simply zero need nor scope for absolutely any kind of labeling or speculative exercise into the intentions of the trader behind a strategy.

Darwinex is unlike other venues -> you have the data to form your opinions.

Using verbiage such as lies and scams makes no sense given all the data available for strategies… opinions can (and should) instead be formed through a thorough, critical evaluation of any DARWIN via all the data provided via:

  1. The DARWIN listing page
  2. Underlying Strategy data
  3. Attributes & associated data
  4. The DARWIN API complements the above in assisting with even deeper analysis.

There is no sense in “making others aware of something strange” that reflects one person’s opinion. This activity may have a place on other forums, not here (because it makes no sense here, everyone has access to particulars that can tell them what they need to know).

Thank you for everyone’s attention.


unfortunatelly 90% of the investability of a darwin depends on the

  • credibility
  • honesty
  • consistency

of the person behind the trackrecord.

It would be good to support this view with references / citations.

A well-supported argument will improve the forum experience. Without that, it is just an opinion.

A better approach to making this argument would be to show other forum visitors, how you would quantify “honesty” with the data available (the other two are covered by the data in straightforward fashion).

Please consider this my humble, genuine feedback to your commentary - it is not intended as anything else :+1:

This is based on facts from trading journal, facts that don’t match with the description of the darwin and the nature of the migrated part.



You’ve now successfully pointed out a discrepancy in the trader’s description vs the reality pointed out by the Underlying Strategy.

This is precisely what everyone needs to do.

What everyone doesn’t need to do is go on a witch-hunt trying to make of this data-driven discrepancy something that is completely unnecessary:

Instead of looking for labels for the trader behind the strategy, other forum users are better served by more commentary on the importance of the underlying strategy in evaluating a DARWIN for invest-ability

You are a respected, long-standing member of the forum.

You can lead by example in these situations. Looking for labels is not that example.

My humble $0.02 :+1:


Sorry, I cannot agree with this in that way because it misses the point.

First, @CavaliereVerde had written details about the discrepancies before he was carpeted by the staff.

Second, you didn’t give any instruction how to point out intentionally false and untruthful descriptions.
That could leave the impression that Darwinex accepts anything there which is only written to trap unexperienced investors. I don’t want to believe that.
The best way would be that the strategy description can be flagged and the flag is shown as long as the description is not updated. A reason for the flag should be added. Even Zulutrade does that in a similar way if they detect something like high risk trading. To avoid abuse, Darwinex could publish the flag only after reading the reasons. I’m sure the Darwinex staff would spend much less time reading the few reasons than trying to correct unwanted behaviour here.

@CavaliereVerde: I personally don’t like words like ‘noobs’ or ‘herd’ as they have a touch of disrespect in my unperfect understanding of English. Maybe my understanding is wrong, and maybe you can replace them with words where degradation cannot be assumed…


I agree with my colleagues, I think this problem with migrants (most of them) makes investors lose a lot of credibility, if I know that they are increasing, but it could have been better.

Because of this we all lose, as a community.

I like the way you write @cavaliere, the way things are.

I had not given my clear opinion about this issue of the migrants. But it is that out of 10, only 1 goes well ( it is only a calculation of its own)

My proposal:

  1. That the Dscore record be calculated from its first day in Darwinex
    Because they come from another broker, with other spreads, many come from market maker, when trading here they crash with different things, their graphics are different from the past.

Translated with (free version)