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.

Regularity should be more tolerant

I dont’ have proof about nothing, but I am quite strong on my opinion that Regularity is liked and considered fair by the majority, let’s wait and see… :slight_smile:
Maybe also I have ten ideas to improve Darwinia but here we are talking about Regularity.

1 Like

guys, i have a question, will the Regularity down within the same weeks/months once you have reach the higher water mark?

Say my darwin was 96.3 Regularity yesterday then all of a sudden when i check this morning, it drop down to 87.18. Can anyone explain whether this is possible ?

FYI, im a swing trader, i trade about average of 8-10 trades/months only.

1 Like

Hi @eyon!

Regularity is measured exactly with the same formula as Experience.

While a slight drop on Regularity may occur due to the normalization process, in the long term only increases.

More information about how we measure Experience and D-Periods here:

1 Like

Thanks for replying.

Yes, that is what i initially thought about Regularity, which is similar to Experience whereby there will be no decaying of point once you had achieve the high water mark. Apparently, that is not the case with Regularity.

I have 2 scenario below, can anyone please explain whether their Regularity will be the same or not.

Scenario A:
Trader A make ONE single trade with 30 lots in each month (consecutively for 3 months)

Scenario B:
Trader B make 30 trades with 1 lot per day over the span of 30 days in each month (consecutively for 3 months).

If all other parameters are deemed equal (currency pair, market exposure, lot size, D-leverage… etc). The only difference is the way/pattern of entering those trades. Will their Regularity be the same??

If it is not the same, then i presume Regularity isn’t really measuring trader activity/regularity but their trading pattern. How consistent is their entry, exit, duration consistency which are already measured by the existing IAs i.e. OS, CS & DC. Right?

Market movement is fluidic, we cant be too rigid in maintaining those Regularity, sometimes there is just no opportunity in the market to enter/force a trade.

Correct me if i’m wrong & please do enlighten me. Thanks.

1 Like

I couldn’t agree more.
some of these “trader performance” metrics are quite linear and rigid, whereas most skilled traders understand that good trading month to month requires patience and flexibility.

It is a matter of significance .

Trader A trades once per month, so 12 decisions per year, it is a very small sample, very easy to be influenced by a lucky or unlucky streak.

Trader B trades 30 times per month so 360 times per year, 360 decisions are a significant sample.

Going to your case I never experienced a drop in Regularity and I am here since more than 3 years.
Your can be a technical bug, by the way only the las ranking of the month matters.

1 Like

As you can see from the screenshot above. (a bit blurry for the 22 April as i took it using my phone)

Regularity for 22 April is 96.93, the next day drop to 87.18. . Nooooooooo !!!, my darwinia position… sigh…:sweat:

1 Like

Not to go off topic if it ends up being that way…

But on the subject of skilled traders, I’d like to add a little tidbit if I may…

From my own experience - not to be taken as anything but one person’s experience, and hence limited by definition, regardless of the amount of time he may or may not have spent in the field.

A trader is as “skilled” as the last time he was able to successfully “continue” extracting alpha from the same source -> a.k.a. her or his existing trading strategy, for instance.

The best skill you can acquire as a trader is the ability to measure (preferably probabilistically, since there are more than a few statisticians on this thread from what I can see), whether that source is still worthy of tapping.

This has perhaps been my biggest challenge over time, one that my own personal approach towards, is purely Bayesian. Others will differ in theirs, and that’s the nature of things.

The moral of the story is:

Accept that one’s skill isn’t just in generating decent returns, it’s in estimating the continued existence of the “ability” to do so, independent of time… in achieving consistency along the way while the well hasn’t dried up.

In doing so, we become more humble to reality -> that we are participants in a market where alpha without a shadow of a doubt reverts to new levels above or below those desired, at some point or the other, unless you adapt.

And if we should focus on building a skill set at all, it is this, humility and acceptance that we are mere cells from a drop in the financial ocean.

The most skilled traders among us will observe these behaviours, and adapt accordingly, and it is they who will attract the most AuM over time - their results over time, from adaptive alpha will speak for themselves.

And we have plenty of those in the Hall of Fame.

So let’s take a little pressure off ourselves… and be more humble to our own realities.

Consistency speaks volumes compared to anything else in this line of work.

Regularity is only one metric among many at Darwinex, that helps traders think this way.


As you can see your MUS has a regularity of 93% today (day 25)
It is the same as my CVL and it is slightly below average, the right value for today is 96% as LSC , KVL and many others.
Probably 96% on day 23 was due to a wrong calculation.
If you trade in a regular way you willl always end the month above 95% , almost always above 98%.

1 Like

I guess you are right, like l mentioned earlier, my average trade per months is about 8-12 trades only. For this months, i had closed about 80% of my average monthly trade within just the first 2 weeks or so. Hence, the Regularity spike then drop to normal level again.

Btw, i do notice that Regularity can indeed goes up and down depending on your trade activity. So, no big deal if it decrease a bit.

1 Like

I trade very infrequently and I cannot help but feel this is the reason why my regularity score is so low.


If you dont’ trade at least once per week it is impossible to make money with Darwinia, you will experience problems with Regularity, Experience and Market Correlation.

BTW if your low frequency macro trading makes 40% per year you will attract a crowd of private investors, and this is the final goal. :wink:


Hi All,

I have traded 3 trade so far this month, making the regularity score for Darwinia 51.71%

I have noticed that winners of Darwinia achieve at least 80% regularity score to be in a chance to win.

Any suggestions on how to increase the regularity score plz?

That’s easy.
TRADE MORE. :face_with_raised_eyebrow:



Compares the DARWINs monthly activity with the average from the previous three months.


Over the last week (23-27 Dec), my Regularity score increased by about 4% or so, but I didn’t do anything on my trade account :thinking:

I seem to remember @bianka replied somewhere else on the forum that regularity was calculated the same way as Experience. My Experience didn’t increase this week however…

EDIT: Here it is

Change to the Regularity adjustment of the DarwinIA rating

Form its 55th (April 2020) edition onward, the DarwinIA rating’s formula will be calculated with a slightly different Regularity adjustment than until now.

Here’s how the rating’s three components were working up to now:

The most important one is the D-score followed by the DARWIN’s monthly return. Note that beyond a monthly return of 10%, this variable won’t significantly contribute to the rating. With those 2 we calculate the rating´s grade which will be penalized if Regularity doesn’t reach 100%. The lower the Regularity, the greater the penalization.

In order to obtain a 100% in Regularity, a DARWIN’s market exposure in the current month must reach at least its average market exposure in the previous 3 months. Market exposure for Regularity is calculated the same way it’s calculated for the Experience attribute.

And this is the change we’re introducing:

In order to obtain a 100% in Regularity, a DARWIN’s market exposure in the current month must reach at least 80% of its average market exposure in the previous 3 months.

That is, it’ll be much easier to reach 100% Regularity.

For example, in March 2020 around 500 DARWIN reached 100% Regularity. With the new rule, more than 1,000 DARWINs would have reached 100%.

We hope you can agree with this change and please give us all the feedback you have.


It seems you have been listened! :+1:


I have been saying the same for years…you are now listening. :innocent:
EDIT: I misunderstood your comment…yes, yes…I’ve been listened (or it just was a coincidence because it is a logical common sense change). Anyway the important is not that I’ve been saying to make this change for years, but Darwinex has made a good decision for all of us…Still I disagree with the D-Score weight on Darwinia that still excludes good young darwins and reward old fart darwins with a one lucky month.


Great news, thanks Bianka.