CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 66 % 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.

ZVQ : migrated and live results

Hi guys!

Thanks for your comments!

We take note on this and will improve Drawdown calculation for all periods.

Currently, DARWIN’s header shows the most accurate value of Drawdown (I still reckon it doesn’t show -22%, but -20%).

On the other hand, period drawdown (the one you point out) is based on the chart and thus, not precise when you zoom in.

I understand probably this is not enough for some of you, but I want to make clear that we hear you and take note on everything that must be improved.


The point is that recent behaviour is more significant than far behaviour, especially when the far trackrecord is migrated.
Having an “high resolution” DD is very important to spot bad trading.


Also I suspect it is difficult to get fully accurate DD data from migrated history -> all orders would have to be simulated against some kind of historical data to get that, which I doubt how it is done.

So native DD is always likely to be bigger than derivable DD from migrated data -> Maybe this difficulty is why they initially decided to go with current method, for consistency’s sake (I would have done the same, being a lazy programmer that I am).

But yes, fully reflective DD, even if only for native track record would be very helpful.


And this makes migrations even more dangerous:

  • selection bias from the trader
  • publication bias from the trader
  • optimistic DD from Darwinex

They need trackrecords but every time you give visibility to bad stuff you slow down the growth of good stuff.


When I was getting started, I remember fumbling my way around, and the webinars being a big help. Maybe potential dangers of migrated history should be stressed in beginner investor webinars @miguelrDarwinex


Thanks @yhlasx!

I will forward your suggestion.

Edit: I confirm we are warning it on the investor webinars.


Hi Miguel,

Within this thread the problem of low resolution of equity curves of DARWINs was discussed in context of potentially “hidden” DD risks. Let me give you another example to emphasize the urgency of said issue (FSK):




6 posts were merged into an existing topic: ERQ – OakLadder

If you look to trading journal the behaviour of ZVQ seems very consistent and stable.
Maybe the candlestick with the long tail is a technical mistake.

1 Like

I haven’t forgot about ZVQ while it seems that you forgot to post this community. :smile_cat:


Confirmed after further 2months.
Any opinions from experienced investors?

Hello all,

I’m about to take quite a position on ZVQ (around 30k) and I’m wondering if these problems were more or less fixed.

I’m also a bit surprised that they have been positive over 10 years period with only a 22% DD. If you take a look at the stock market, last 10 yers there’s been years negative and a DD of more or less 35% (in 2008). Are these monthly and yearly performance really realistic? I know I have to remove the performance fees + that the calculations are in compounding… but still looks like pretty impressive for a noob like me (and that’s why I’m asking the experts here).

Thanks for any new info, really appreciate it!


Why would you invest a sum of money you consider big on an instrument you don t really understand? Invest 200 at first, study the behavior of the darwin 3 months and if satisfied invest gradually more as you get a feel for the darwin.


We can add that now it is likely a very bad time to buy.
ZVQ is on highs so a major DD it is very likely to happen.
Historical DD is 20% and it would require at least 6 month to be recovered even according to past performence.

1 Like

Interesting! How much would you consider the value have to drop in % from the highs to get into the darwin?.

IMHO I guess it’s super complicated to time it, and while I do understand your comment it’s hard to tell even if now it’s on his highest values, if it’s going to drop or continue going up and for how long.

Thanks to both of you!

1 Like

I would say at least 10% .
Clearly nobody knows when it will happen, neither the trader. :smiley:
What is certain is that now is on highs and above average.

1 Like

Yeah hehe. How would you look at that 10%? As I understood reading Darwinex help the graph is on compound, so would you look at ALL the history in the graph and wait for a 10% drop? Or just look at the last year, 6m…?

Or maybe just a 10% from the max DARWIN price?

It doesn’t make much difference , I think you got the message.
Do not buy high and do not dream.
I suggest you to split your investment among at least 10 darwins and monitor everything at least for 3 months on demo.

Take advantage of the backtester and be inspired by the Model Portfolio.

1 Like

Thanks a lot for your advice @CavaliereVerde. Really appreciate your time.

I consider myself a quantitative investor so I love strategies that are backtested and usually automatically traded. Not that I’m only looking for that, but have a preference for it.

I’ve been taking a look over the past weeks to quite a few darwins. However is hard to find darwins that got several years of history (prefer to see this to make sure the statistic and probabilities are doing the work, and not only luck or over optimization) with great ratio return/DD and very low divergence. That’s why ZVQ got my attention.

I also have a demo portfolio with HFD, ZVQ and ERQ, but sadly using the backtesting tool looks like ZVQ data can be used only from Nov 2018. In any case, as I said, I’m going to have a hard time finding 10 darwins with more or less the characteristics I’m looking for.

1 Like