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.

NemesisCraze Demo Portfolio

Hi there, I’d like to share my portfolio with you. I’m a lot a DIY guy and I’m a former C programmer, so I started to write trading algorithms, thinking that it would be interesting. And it is interesting, indeed, but it is a hell of work. After some time I realized that I’d need a lot of time to develop good strategies, so I thought that it will be better for me if I let the real Pro traders to do the job for me. You earn money, I earn money, everyone’s happy :slight_smile:

So, I have some rough rules to design my portfolio (but they’re not written in stone). Sometimes I feel that I can relax a rule a bit, depending on different factors (for instance, when some other traders in the forum like the Darwin, or if some parameter is a bit low but it has others to compensate strongly).

I think that it is possible to get around a 25% CAGR with this portfolio, with not too much DD. We’ll see…


  • Ex == 10
  • Rs > 6.5, the higher, the better
  • Mc > 7 This will show that the trader is not a permabull, and is able to grow the account in any market environment
  • Monthly divergence < 0.5
  • Performance > 6.5
  • La > 6, or the other Darwin’s parameters should look really good
  • Trader Equity > $1000
  • At least 12 months with a proven record in Darwinex, OR if it has very good metrics, >3 months in Darwinex and 12 months with a migrated track record
  • The Darwin’s developer ideally would be known here or in other forums
  • All the Darwins will have a Stop Loss in -25%. This is a Buy & Hold portfolio, and I’d like to sleep knowing that if something goes very wrong with some Darwin I’ll be able to calmly review what was wrong with it,and if I want it to enter again in the game.
  • I added some darwin mainly because their Pf was > 9. I think that it is very important that statistically the strategy has a real alpha.

I don’t want to watch my chosen darwins every day. Actually I’d like a portfolio to run and forget during a whole year… But I’m afraid that I’ll end up taking a look every day/week :slight_smile:

All of the Darwins will have the same % money allocation. I’ve been thinking about using something like a momentum strategy to allocate more or less money to each of them, but that will make me to work manually a lot. May be when the API is developed I’ll code a dual momentum strategy or something like that, but I’m not sure about this.

I don’t plan to trade Darwins. I don’t plan to exit any of them unless his parameters change or I see something strange. I’m not (too) worried about a 15% DD because I expect that the whole portfolio mitigate this problem. We’ll see…

EDIT: This portfolio has been moved to demo.

Probably I’ll start entering in the Darwins that are in a 5% DD or something like that.

So, this is my 24 Darwins portfolio:


The following Darwins are also in the portfolio, with the same allocation that the others, but I’ll watch them a bit more closely:

PGH —> I’d like the Rs higher
BDR —> I’d like the Rs higher
SYO —> Not in the forum, but I heard in different places that he is (or they are?) a respected trader.
CLA —> He’s not in the forum, but the metrics are nice
LCW —> The metrics seem very good, but I’m a bit worried about the statement of the developer: “Objective : 15 - 20+% return quarterly”
EXG —> Small trackrecord and Ex, pero I like all the other metrics. Pf==9,6 Cp==10… I’ll take the risk of the statistics.
XYF —> All the metrics are very high. I like that he uses multiple strategies in the same Darwin. although I know that it could be a problem (because I don’t know if he follows his own rules in every strategy), overall I think is nice.
RAT —> Not too much Ex, but he’s well known here and I like a lot the metrics. Pf almost 10. I’ll take the risk.
HFD —> Not in the forum, but very good metrics.
UEI —> I just couldn’t resist this one. Last months has been incredible, I guess he’ll mean revert but his Mc==9.9, Rs==8.4, and Pf=8.2 are very nice. I’m worried a bit about the divergence though.


EDIT: I want to warmly thank the people in the forum because most of my portfolio rules are condensed knowledge that I’ve gathered from you guys :slight_smile:


Thanks and a big Good Luck for this new project ! :four_leaf_clover:

Thank you for sharing it, Nemesis. I’ll be glad on working on this metrics combination. Seems well studied!

Edit: just IMHO, 2 months as minimum history in Darwinex seems very low, setting it for 200 days (~9 months, or ~3 quarters), would gives us much more statistical consistency than just Ex=10 because it’s factoring possible different market/economic/sentiment conditions. Cheers

1 Like

Yep, I absolutely agree. This was the absolutely minimum if they have migrated good track history from other place, and if they have good metrics. Actually lots of the Darwins in the portfolio has at least 12 months, and ideally that would be my absolute minimum… But there seem to be lots of good traders out there, with very good metrics, good comments from other traders in this forum, and good (unverified by Darwinex) history.

Thanks for your comment, I realize now that it could be a bit confusing. 16/24 Darwins have been at least 12 months trading. 7/24 Darwins (QUA, STV, SYO, LCW, XYF, HZY, RAT) has a proven record in Darwinex of >3 months, and at least one year migrated.

The only additional one that breaks the rules is HFD, actually I was hesitating to include it in the portfolio. Actually he breaks multiple rules; he is not in the forum, the track record is not too long, Ex!=10 and Rs is not as high as I’d like for someone that is breaking so many of my own rules… But he has a Pf==9.8, good La and Cp… I don’t know, I think I like it, seems a good trader.

So for sake of clarity, I’m going to change the rule to:

  • At least 12 months with a proven record in Darwinex, OR if it has very good metrics, >3 months in Darwinex and 12 months with a migrated track record

HFD is very interesting but still above average, some kind of honeymoon.
To buy after the usual 15% drawdown. :wink:

1 Like

Again thanks Nemesis for sharing! Cheers.

1 Like


Thank you for sharing your researches @NemesisCraze :nerd:
Wish you the best for this new-born portfolio! (and 24 DARWINs is a “secure” choice imo.)


:blush: music to my ears

1 Like

@NemesisCraze nice post. Just to say I have a similar spread of capital across various markets and so far this year have returned 14% from investing in other traders alongside my own trading. Very decent rate of return. I simply pick those with high D-scores and smoothish curves (i.e. not making massive gains in a short space then nothing).

All the best


Congrat for sharing it, Nemesis !

As return is proportional to time and sigma proportional to mathsqrt(time) watching long term is exciting.

Therefore the shorter term you watch an EC, the more scary it is. :wink:

1 Like

:joy: yeah, I’d love to be able to watch it only once a month or so, or even less. I’ll need some training to be able to do that though!

1 Like

I watch my portfolio 10 times per day but I don’t do anything, that’s the important thing! :wink:


You’r perfectly right. Watching the portfolio 10 times per day is quite better than having a chat 10 times per day with your wife. :sunglasses:


:joy: that made me chuckle

Trying to increase a bit the returns, but keeping the risk low, I have decided to increase the allocation for some Darwins, as well as adding a couple more. That goes against my initial idea of equal-weight every Darwin, but I think that in the medium-long term it will make the portfolio better (and it will reward some specific Darwins).

So, I added THA and ATL Darwins. I hope that both are still open in a couple of months when I move this to a real portfolio, because their divergence is a bit bad. But as their results are so good, I think I’m ok losing a little %. Let’s see…

Added rule:

Depending on the Darwin return the last 2 years, I increase the allocation:

  • Return > 80% --> Allocation == three times (3x) the other Darwins
  • Return > 60% --> Allocation == two times (2x) the other Darwins

Portfolio allocation modifications:

LVS -> 3x
THA -> 3x
ATL -> 3x
SYO -> 3x
FEG -> 3x
QUA -> 2x
STV -> 2x

So, approximately these 7 Darwins will get the same money allocation than the other 19.

I’m a long-term investor, I’m ok with some months DD. I’d love to listen your thoughts about this allocation (too much weight in just a few Darwins may be?). Stability is very important for me (and returns, of course, ha!).

Also, I plan to double leverage the portfolio.


I can understand you, probably you “feel” that those darwins are more professional and so deserve more trust in the form of invested money.
BTW you have to keep in mind that the lowest risk and highest diversification come with an equal weighted portfolio.

1 Like

Hmm… actually I don’t think that they are more professional. I know that there are lots of professional traders in the portfolio. But I think that these specific Darwins seem able to provide better returns. If this is the case, a highest return would also compensate for the DD of themselves and other Darwins.

Anyway, I’ll think about your words. May be 3x is too much. I just wanted a slightly tilt to higher profitability, but the lower the risk, the better.

Return is the most primitive indicator.
All the Investable Attributes system has been designed to overcome this.

Even good traders tend to impress the audience with selected systems and above average past returns.
High return is not so significant when it has been done privately, before being visible.

1 Like

I absolutely agree, but still those Darwins are inside my (hopefully good) rules (with the exception of Cp, I’ll have to monitor it more closely). Of course I’m not searching for maximum returns, disregarding the other attributes!.

Also, all of them has at least 6 months after migration. Not the biggest track record, that’s true…

But I understand you; if I want lower risk probably it is not the best idea to use 3x. I don’t know, may be something like 2x & 1.5x is better. I’ll let it sink in my mind and the answer should arrive…

1 Like

For example I would give more trust to some of those darwins but for other reasons!
THA SYO LVS and QUA are registered managers with a company.
This is something beyond Return and also beyond DScore.
Total lenght of trackrecord also is much more important than Return.

1 Like