If darwinia doesn’t impact divergence I think we don’t have to consider it for Capacity.
You are right but where did i mention we should consider it for capacity?
I was just talking about that in future investor money will be much more (important) then DarwinIA money.
Yes, correct. I´d be very satisfied with 1.8fM of investment in my Darwin…don´t you?
I trust Darwinex, I thing they are different trying to make something special.
Now my two cents about this business: I have heard many good advice to suceed on trading, but the one which is giving me more results is something so simple and logic…¨conservate your capital¨…I think Warren Buffett said it (not sure), this is the most important thing about trading…CONSERVATE YOUR CAPITAL…if you learn to protect your capital when you trade, your chances to build a profitable business are higher. Another one…don´t take losses personally, you can´t control the market, no matter what…so leave loses as small as possible, and move on…
Realistic expectations are always important in this field.
My KVL was stacking 670k one month ago,now I have 570k.
LVS is one of the best systems and is stacking 600k.
A good darwin with 65 DScore and 6% return can win 150k maybe every 2 months, so 450k is a realistic target.
I totally agree with you. It was a little joke talking about the 1.8M, however I don´t think it is impossible. But after learning some lessons in my last year, now I aim to step by step goals. My priority now is to build a solid D-Score month after month, that eventually will take me to rank in the first 48 in Darwinia contest. From there on, doing the same all the time…one day I´ll reach the half million of Dollar monthly investment, and then I´ll look at the 1.8M stuff…but now I am 100% focus on D-Score, not distractions…money will arrive when I am ready to handle. Thanks CavaliereVerde!
So I get that Darwinia is a good advertising tool, attracts new and developing traders to the platform and provides an incentive for strugling traders that are improving. How about adding more disqualifying factors to Darwinia on top of divergence to disincentivise bad behaviour.
Bad trading => bad Rs or Mc => bad DScore
I mean actual value thresholds on individual attributes not just D Score, RS, MC, LA higher than 5 etc
@Forexintradiadarwin, My little advice to you is to forget about your d score and instead focus more on your trading and risk management. And as long as you re maintaining positive results with good risk management, it will definitely impact on your d score.
Yes, right. What I meant is that without a good D-Score it is virtually impossible to get anything in Darwinia contest. So, of course a high D-Score comes with some high notes in several atributes. I don´t agree with the way they weight but this is another story. Thank you.
Now you get what I mean. I have taken a look at some Darwins here and there are some with high scores with poor performance. I’m just wondering whether the d score decreases as your performance wanes or never decreases at all.
I am more focused on performance than any other thing, but there is a difference bethween the real underlying strategy and the Darwin performance. If you see my BIL darwin has 6.5% overal profit in the last 5 months, while my real strategy has 41%. It is a bid difference, even last month I made 11% profit in my underlyining strategy while I lost 1.4% in the Darwin…I understand the risk managment, but I can not understand negative performance of the darwin while you are making profits in the real account. Also the weight of experience and D-Score is too much in Darwinia contest, while performance -what in my opinion should be the most important, weight less- weight less…so you can see some darwins with high D-Score and Experience, but mediocre or bad performance on top of the ranking…
I think Darwinex is doing an extraordinary overall job, but this thing in Darwinia is a bug to me.
I just took a look at your BILL and believe me, that equity is way too low for Forex. From the little I have garnered here, it all boils down to VAR but I think you should verify more from Darwinex regarding the performance between your underlying and your Darwin.
However,there’s something traders need to understand here. It makes absolutely no sense to me trying to get a good score by trading with such a low capital. Traders need to understand that Darwinex is a broker just like other brokers out there and they should concentrate on making money for themselves which is the primary objective, but if they attract investors while doing this then it is a double advantage.
If you believe you deserve a place in Darwinia then you need to increase your capital and still trade well.
I already asked Darwinex why is the difference between my underlying strategy and darwin and botton line the short answer is VAR. So, sometimes if my risk is higher than usual even I profit in the underlying strategy, the Darwin is penalized. I disagree with this, but I can´t change it, so I have to learn to trade for the Darwin instead the real strategy.
Regarding the low capital I learned to trade with low capital, and it is proven (to me) that I perform better with this amount than a higher one (this is the only reason I don´t increase it). If I see this could be a problem for investors, I´d think about it.
In other hand, answering your question, no, I don´t think my darwin still deserve a good place in Darwinia, hoever my underlying strategy could be in the top 50. What make me unconfortable is having to trade for the darwin instead the underlying…I need to learn how to handle this better…If some inverstors had placed capital in my underlyining strategy they´d be very, very happy with the results…while the Darwin performance is also positive, but not comparable.
I am plenty confidence my darwin BIL will profit above 20%-25% this year, but I think the underlying could reach maybe above 70%…So, if I get these results why my low capital would be a problem for an investor? Is not performance what an investor is looking for?
This month there are TEN Darwins that will get a prize with a quote less than 100.
I undestand and somehow support the incentive given to long standing darwins that start doing well, but when a Darwin is still under 100, probably they still are not doing a good job.
Are there any program to change darwinia’s rules?
Disagree, PFZ is doing a very good job…
Last 6M and last 1Y matter for current quality.
Stacking return at the beginning and then sleeping is a bad habit in the social investment world.
DScore prizes indeed the opposite.
There is still one more week to go, leaderboard is subject to changes depending on the regularity.
The odd thing of October 2018 is another IMO.
We have a lot o lucky guys with a DScore lower than 60 ad a return higher than 10%.
11 below 60 and 3 of those have a quote below 100.
Anyway it seems that with 3000 darwins it’s more and more likely that there will be darwins with a low Dscore but a very high return.
More and more I look into this… and more I convince myself that extending the reference period of the darwinia prize to 3 months will be better (so even the correlation could be extended to 3 months )…
I agree with this!
I am asking that since a lot of time…