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.

The Best Filter: Excursions?

I think YES !

But again …

The reloaded version will propose natively this filter, the only best for me ?

1 Like

I think NO.
Look to consistency return diagram of NTI :

And ?

Imagine ONE day invest ! You risk is the double of you reward !

So, your Stop Loss = 2 x your Take Profit.

No problem ?

Imagine NTI with a good excursions(RR>2) and its winning position % ! Yes it will be the best strategy.

THE only best strategy (for me, and YOU, le cavalier vert, don’t have the monopoly of the intelligence and the knowledge) will have:

great excursions + good timing of close + %winning days > 50% !

Those which succeed in having 65-75-… of % of success WITH a stop loss>=take profit will have or have (but there is none at darwinex of it or if not to show it to me) the World of the Investment to its feet.

That begins with a filter on the excursions. This is my opinion and my analysis.

For me, Darwinex must filter this hope to see efficient strategies (profitable at the less risk) and put them only on the DWEX, not the martingale strategies etc

So, yes i want filter all the NTI strategies, VQG, ERQ etc etc and i will like to be able to natively do it thanks to a excursions filter.

I assume you mean stoploss < takeprofit?

I would love to have a RR > 2 with a winning percentage around 75% … I would be printing money with no end :smiley:

Reality shows that usually, strategies with an excellent risk reward ratio have a rather bad winning percentage (below 50%) whereas strategies with a bad risk reward have a higher winning percentage. That’s just the nature of things.

In my opinion, both are legitimate ways to trade. In the end, all that matters is the expectation per trade. However, it’s a valid concern if some investors prefer strategies with a good risk reward over strategies with a high winning percentage. The beauty of Darwinex is that you can freely assemble a portfolio of Darwins that fit your very own selection criteria.

I agree having more means to build your own custom filters would be beneficial.


Efficient strategies exist in theory, but in practice it boils down to what @KlondikeFX already - quite accurately - said in his post above:

Your Expectation / Trade = realistic benchmark that matters.

I would add that Consistency should also be considered alongside Expectation with equal or more weighting, as some “RR>2” strategies tend to skew expectation with a few big hits while usually carrying lower expectation/trade in the remainder of their samples.

The same applies to overly low RR strategies, e.g. “RR<0.1” where gains from a high win rate may quite easily be dwarfed by one or two catastrophically bad trades.


There are strategies that work with a RR of 0.5 and strategies that work with a RR of 2, it depends on the entry rule.
If you force a high RR to a retracement strategy it will end to an endless row of losers.

What matters is the result: annualized return and drawdown.

1 Like

Sorry but i am not agreement with you.

The Trading = 50% true or 50% false (except the 50% flat)

The Entry = You can launch a coin or another thing Lol

Does there remain what? Management

Risk management to preserve your capital

Money management to optimize

Use the analysis of the market to exceed the 50% of success, right !

I think that the traders must work to exceed to it “one chance on two” and to pose a stop loss smaller than the take profit. It’s hard job !

Believe me, I have tried very hard to improve the risk-reward of my strategy. However, some trading strategies also find a portion of their edge in the stop-loss / take-profit placement.

My strategy is based on scalping retracements in larger trends. So I am usually entering against the short-term market direction in order to profit once the market continues to move in its previous direction. This trading needs a bigger stop-loss to let the market “breath” until it (hopefully) reverses to the mean.

I did improve the risk-reward by using a smaller stop-loss during low volatility and a larger stop-loss in very volatile market situations. But the strategy loses a lot of its edge when I try to play wit SL and TP in order to get to it a very high RR.

I have a couple of ideas for other strategies that would (hopefully) work pretty well with a bigger RR, however, it’s just not doable for every trading style.

I do understand that some investors prefer strategies with a high RR, though :slight_smile:


I have looked into this a bit regarding the strategies on this site.
It seems a lot of the scalping style strategies run at about 0.5 RR (and a lot of them make money doing this) therefore there is no right and wrong. It all comes down to expectancy.

However, I do find the excursions chart useful and always look at it when researching Darwins.
Obviously you do not want to see massive draw downs showing up in there.
I don’t thing the chart or its associated statistics have any bearing on the attribute scores.
In fact, if I remember rightly, it was removed at some stage, but then re-instated after client outcry!

1 Like

Not only scalpers, there are systems with average win of 20 pips and loss of 40 pips, targets range from 4 pips to 40 but RR is often close to 0.5.

I think it is due to the mean reverting nature of the forex market, clear trends are very rare, ranges last much longer than trends, and there is a lot of noise.

1 Like

Agree 100% with @KlondikeFX and @integracore2’s posts.

With that being said, I would almost suggest (guess) that there are many investors who would prefer a high win rate over a high R:R. It may come down to the type of investor and how regularly they tend to track their investment performance. Most people like the feel good factor of winning, and dislike the feeling of losing. If you check your investments often, and you are following a low win rate, high R strategy, you may be more inclined to buy at the top and sell at the bottom as you become discouraged with with your investment in a larger number of consecutive losing trades.

I would therefore not be surprised if many investors would consider this to be a negative aspect of my own strategy, as judging by my backtesting the win rate may even drop further over time … but as has been said, that is just the nature of things:


I read you, i read you…and i understand you !

Conclusion: THE best strategie(s) will have a R:R >= 2 and a %Profit trades >= 50% ! :kissing_heart:

and nobody reaches that point (for the moment).

But a R:R >=1 and %Profit trades >50% will be very good too.

Nobody ? I know some traders…(you could filter with a excursion filter for begin)


I think the conclusion everyone arrived at was “there is no one R:R fits all or is best compared to the rest - different types of strategies carry different R:R thresholds”.

You’re making a great case for your own view on this - which is admirable.

Now all you need to do is demonstrate your opinion being better than everyone else’s, with a track record, and it will strengthen your case even further (I mean this in all seriousness, track record demonstrating validity of opinion = best way to make a great argument) :thumbsup:

1 Like

FYI - Thread relocated to appropriate category.

“Nobody reaches that point (for the moment)”. @TheCheetah, I don’t mean to indulge in self-promotion, but Darwin SSG over the last six months has a 53.9% winrate, average winning trade 50 pips, average losing trade 20 pips. Even taking in account an ugly losing streak in 2016, it still stands at 53% winrate, winning trades 47 pips, losing trades 28 pips.
But these numbers by themselves mean very little, as others have pointed out. The number one quality I would want to maximize, over RR and winrate, are all the intangibles that allow a trader to survive over time - @KlondikeFX clearly showing the way in that department.


As an investor i must say that whats matter to me is the “over all profit” or at least 6 months devided onto the numbers of month (that gives me profit/month), then “% of weeks being positive” and how long have been trading(last but not least)
I found out that a list with this 3 characteristics is a very good on the long term for buying and hold.
This is my opinion.

i dont care how you get that profit, dont care too much the DD, and i dont care at all loosing trades. The historical and the overall profit says to me that you are a winner… that your strategy works overtime… i just like consistency and benefits.
I was doing all on an excel sheet.

1 Like

Thx @cubapipi !

The new website is great and i invent the LARRS Filter:

I test in demo 5 darwins.

La > R- > R+ > Rs = 4 filters > 7.5 = More stability (risk)

I test the young darwins:

Bye bye

1 Like