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.

"TRADE" is wrong "INVEST" is right

I agree with this, but believe me avoiding bad darwins is not so easy as it could seem.
If if were so easy we would have a lot of people posting their fantastic results as investors here.
People tend to show good results when they have them.


[quote=“unlimitedfx, post:5, topic:2344”]
Due to the fact that Darwins are like stocks they should be invested in not traded[/quote]
A misguided argument, knowing that HFT algorithms can buy and resell the same stocks hundreds of times in a single second.

But I think we understood your idea, except that personally I am completely against it.

Certainly the extreme volatility of investors is a source of frustration for the authors of Darwins.

But the remedy for this must be training, even better tools, and so on.

Especially that from a formal and technical point of view, scalping a Darwin even several times a day poses no problem.


@unlimitedfx I support your first idea to rename the button. If that is not against the exchange character of DarwinEX as a place for trading. They didn’t call themselves DarwINVEST… :slight_smile: … is the URL still free? :joy:

I’m against any idea of forcing anybody to stay in an investment and if I would be forced to, I would never, never even think about buying a foreign Darwin, only my own ones.

One of my reasons is that a correction of any kind of errors including typing errors in the investment amount must be possible immediately.


Exact, a lot of bad things can happen.
Suppose I buy a darwin and than I discover that the trader is a scammer.
It could seem that investing is easier than trading but results tell a different story.
Dodging fake traders can be more difficult than trading, maybe we are more superficial when we analyze others.
We put more effort as traders than as investors, so we are profitable as traders and losers as investors.
Often we like to dream when we invest.

Now we are playing to investors, suppose we want to really invest all of our money in darwins.
(if you want to become more rich you have to invest all of your money in a business)
Suppose you need the money, with darwins you can sell the portfolio and wire back the money to your bank in a couple of days.


Just a practical point.

The term ‘Trade’ is neutral, because it’s the same button to buy and sell !!

So an ‘Invest’ button to close a position makes no sense.


I have just reread your old topic.
A lot of wise things were written there.
Probably we are losing as investors because we always want to talentscout.
I am speaking about me @integracore2 and @Medialux .

Maybe you are right, I love simple things and usually simple things work.
I suggest you this investing strategy:
Invest darwins with a profitable trackrecord of 3 years or more.


I agree with @CavaliereVerde overall and rather disagree with the original post for this thread.

In my opinion Darwins are an equivalent asset class to an ETF rather than a traditional fund, and therefore are traded as the investor feels appropriate.

I’m sure if you were an investor in NMM for example you would be rather upset with a minimum hold period right now!


Tststs ! The right word, cause the right fact is “BUY” !

You buy a darwin or you sell your investment.

For me and investors: Open an investment = BUY (a darwin), so you sell when you close the position or a piece of…

When yo ulook the platform, only the term “BUY” is visible, but on your backoffice (PORTOFOLIO) you can see BUY (for add K on the darwin) or SOLD or SELL for close.

1 Like

You see the problem is that most of you have a very narrow view of how the whole thing works and what the whole thing is actually, this is not a quick get rich scheme and unfortunately its seen like this. A a trader can try a quick get rich scheme with his own capital but a serious investor would and should not. As for NMM, 1) it had only a few months of performance not yet fully certified from my point of view, 2) even if you bout right at the top the drawdown is severe but not deadly and on a long term it does not matter, Im not going to perform arithmetic calculations here but maybe someone should imagine 10K divided evenly among 4 darwins one of them being NMM and with a term of investing of 5 years. Do the arithmetic's and think if NMM momentary failure matters. Anyway Im done with debating on this subject as I said again and again everyone is entitled to a opinion.

I think you underestimate the group intelligence on this forum. The vast majority on here are very long term traders or investors with plans they build.

In my personal opinion its hard to say a ‘5 year plan’ on a platform that is still relatively young. I think at the moment reviewing Darwin investments on a case by case basis means I review them at different frequencies. I think its fair to say there is a reason that the top invested are in that position because they achieve good gains with a good risk:reward.

I currently invest in 11 Darwins and I’m more than happy to pay the fee’s etc but if I was locked into an investment I would withdraw all my money and go back to trading ETF’s which in turn would reduce the fee’s the providers get. Just my opinion obviously.


Hey, saying people has a narrow view can be offensive…:angry:
Working wider views has to be demonstrated with facts and results.
You are sharing your opinions and others answer with thier opinions.
If you don’t want to discuss your opinions you are not forced to post here.


Also stating that the main problem is the lack of patience of investors is a narrow view IMO.
After some years lost because of gamblers and scammers it is very difficult to earn my trust, and I want to be free to get rid of a wrong investment.


Apologize but again thinking on short term its a narrow view and its not intended to be a offense.


Searching for long trackrecords is a right idea, but also a 3y trackrecord doesn’t guarantee that the trader will remain profitable for another 3 years or won’t go crazy, so I want complete control on my investment.


There is absolutely nothing wrong with debating issues - it’s a very healthy exercise towards reason, keep it up :slight_smile:

This particular point you make is true in theory but ridiculously difficult in practice - absorbing a loss of NMM’s magnitude is unfortunately an extreme case of loss aversion.

From experience, it is next to impossible for a Martingale to stay alive unless the trader has superior knowledge in LP/exchange economics and the skills to implement it.

Absorbing mammoth martingale losses in live trading is infinitely harder than observing theoretical maxima in statistically illusive backtests.

Just my opinion from experience.


Nothing wrong indeed but pointless from my point of view. The fact that people have the possibility of building a portofolio is good until is spoiled by trying to outsmart the smart.

Nobody is trying to outsmart the smart.
We are trying to find the smart covering or avoiding losses caused by fakes.
Holes produced by scammers or immature traders are spoiling portfolios.


Well good luck with that @CavaliereVerde. One more thing and one last time Darwinex algos already do that for you, judging after what those algos do I dare to say that speaking of traders here is a little bit to much even though there are good traders here no doubt about it.


I think that here we have the best traders of the world, but avoiding bad ones isn’t so easy as it could seem.


…but it is getting easier :wink: