[DARWIN] JTL by okcm2019

[okcm2019]

Hello.
Sorry for the delay in posting.
Here is this month's fund report.
No funds were added.

Regarding recent performance, The results for the first entry in a split trade are not that bad, The price of the subsequent split entries has been unfavorable.
JTL's average profit/loss per trade is just a little less than 0.1%, If there are many unfavorable entries, the profit/loss will be nearly zero.
In the high volatility environment of last year, the average profit/loss per trade was higher and the funds were not as large, so the impact on performance was smaller, However, this year's lower volatility has resulted in lower average gains/losses and more funds than last year, which has had a greater impact on performance.
I have tried reducing the number of splits after my last post, It is difficult to continue this as the monthly divergence values are getting worse.
I know one of the reasons is that my own funds are too large, but I have previously written that I would keep my funds up to $1 million,
so I would like to try other ways to improve as much as possible, reducing funds being the last method I would use.
Sorry, I will reply to questions tomorrow.

 

[cabraloca]

Well, We still waiting for a recovery.....1 year of 0 return and...what about the cost of oportunity?...Finally this Darwin is out of control. Piano piano it will go to 0. The trader changed something...and thats a big mistake. It something is working....DONT TOUCHT IT!!!

 

[Andras0503]

My darwin portfolio would be massively in losses without JTL's profits. I would give an example: let's say I have 100 EUR overall net profits, while I paid 120 EUR performance fees, and I paid 220 EUR management fees. With this example, I would like to say that Darwinex Investor itself is a mediocre investment: so it is pointless to blame one or another trader. JTL is still one of the better ones.

Why do I think a darwin portfolio is a mediocre investment? My theory is that even a darwin portfolio of the top 10 darwins* does not have enough alpha to significantly overcome the investor fees. While the raw trades are in profits (there is no doubt about it, and it is still a great achievement, because the trader fees [commission + spread] are involved here), an investor does not see that much of these raw profits, because of the investor fees.
(*The top 10 darwins are subjective, however, from the publicly available data and using some methods, we can identify the top traders, and apply some basic allocation between their darwins. This is what I mean by the portfolio of the top 10 darwins.)

I think there is one way the Darwinex Investment could work. If you know personally a darwin provider, and you know and trust their system, then you could invest only in this particular darwin. If you do not have such connections, then it is only gambling to choose only one (or a few) darwins. In this case, you must create a larger portfolio based on the publicly available data, identifying the top traders. After this, my above theory is applied: this portfolio will overcome the investor fees only marginally. This is my conclusion of the Darwinex Investor.

 

[javier7475]

My darwin portfolio would be massively in losses without JTL's profits. I would give an example: let's say I have 100 EUR overall net profits, while I paid 120 EUR performance fees, and I paid 220 EUR management fees. With this example, I would like to say that Darwinex Investor itself is a mediocre investment: so it is pointless to blame one or another trader. JTL is still one of the better ones.

Why do I think a darwin portfolio is a mediocre investment? My theory is that even a darwin portfolio of the top 10 darwins* does not have enough alpha to significantly overcome the investor fees. While the raw trades are in profits (there is no doubt about it, and it is still a great achievement, because the trader fees [commission + spread] are involved here), an investor does not see that much of these raw profits, because of the investor fees.
(*The top 10 darwins are subjective, however, from the publicly available data and using some methods, we can identify the top traders, and apply some basic allocation between their darwins. This is what I mean by the portfolio of the top 10 darwins.)

I think there is one way the Darwinex Investment could work. If you know personally a darwin provider, and you know and trust their system, then you could invest only in this particular darwin. If you do not have such connections, then it is only gambling to choose only one (or a few) darwins. In this case, you must create a larger portfolio based on the publicly available data, identifying the top traders. After this, my above theory is applied: this portfolio will overcome the investor fees only marginally. This is my conclusion of the Darwinex Investor.

Hi!

Do you use leverage?

If the backtest are correct, if you use leverage x 2, for example, you get similar or better returns than the Darwins themselves depending on the Darwin divergence

For example

DARWIN Backtesting Tool - Darwinex

The DARWIN backtesting tool shows the return, the P&L, the performance fees and the final equity that any DARWIN investment porfolio you create would have generated

www.darwinex.com

For how long have you been usin Darwins? Does your results are similar than the backtest?

I have been using Darwins for not too long so I can't check it by self

Thanks and regards!

 

[Andras0503]

Hi!

Do you use leverage?

If the backtest are correct, if you use leverage x 2, for example, you get similar or better returns than the Darwins themselves depending on the Darwin divergence

For example

DARWIN Backtesting Tool - Darwinex

The DARWIN backtesting tool shows the return, the P&L, the performance fees and the final equity that any DARWIN investment porfolio you create would have generated

www.darwinex.com

For how long have you been usin Darwins? Does your results are similar than the backtest?

I have been using Darwins for not too long so I can't check it by self

Thanks and regards!

Using leverage increases your management fee costs.

Leverage can be beneficial because you don't have to deposit large amounts of money into the investor account for a tiny return, and you can use this money elsewhere: buy bonds or shares, or use it for your own trading. But if you use 3x leverage, compared to your deposit you will pay 3.6% management fee yearly, not 1.2%. So, you pay the costs anyway...

I'm about to write a post to another thread with my detailed statistics. I can see that the management fee is quite an important cost.

I think the backtesting tool is accurate (including all costs and the divergence). The problem is that what darwins are selected in the tool, because this kind of selection involves survivorship bias...

(Sorry for the off-topic in this thread.)

 

[javier7475]

El uso del apalancamiento aumenta los costos de sus tarifas de administración.

El apalancamiento puede ser beneficioso porque no es necesario depositar grandes cantidades de dinero en la cuenta del inversor para obtener un rendimiento mínimo, y puede utilizar este dinero en otra parte: comprar bonos o acciones, o utilizarlo para sus propias operaciones. Pero si utiliza un apalancamiento de 3x, en comparación con su depósito, pagará una tarifa de gestión del 3,6% anual, no el 1,2%. Entonces, los costos los pagas de todos modos...

Estoy a punto de escribir una publicación en otro hilo con mis estadísticas detalladas. Veo que la comisión de gestión es un coste bastante importante.

Creo que la herramienta de backtesting es precisa (incluidos todos los costos y la divergencia). El problema es que qué darwins se seleccionan en la herramienta, porque este tipo de selección implica un sesgo de supervivencia...

(Perdón por estar fuera de tema en este hilo).

thanks a lot for your response

 

[cabraloca]

This Darwin is pure scam

 

[ncfx]

This Darwin is pure scam

Why is so? How you came to this conclusion?

 

[cabraloca]

Why is so? How you came to this conclusion?

just analyze....the results in te last 8 months .....and the comissions......this trader was profitable in the past but in the last 8 months is out of control and he is gambling every tade, he can win one trade and lose two times in the next one. Is clear he is gambling

 

[IlIlIlIlI]

just analyze....the results in te last 8 months .....and the comissions......this trader was profitable in the past but in the last 8 months is out of control and he is gambling every tade, he can win one trade and lose two times in the next one. Is clear he is gambling

If his comment "Automated momentum based strategy." on the Darwin is still right, he uses a robot for trading.

So there is no gambling, it is all in line with the programming, regardless whether rules are followed or lost because of errors.
There cannot be an emotional intention for anything as long as there is no manual trading.

I wonder why you are so upset as the yearly loss currently shown on the Darwin is only 2.69%, increased by slippage and management fees.

 

[cabraloca]

I am sorry , I repeat..this is shit....I am going out of this scam.....stop gambling man.

 

[funkymonkey]

Any input from @okcm2019 would be appreciated.
@cabraloca : it's unfortunate but past performance is not indicative of future performance.

 

[IlIlIlIlI]

https://team.alphanet.io/darwin_analysis/JTL/?sv=6.5&pf=20.0&mf=1.2&is=00001

 

[cabraloca]

Any input from @okcm2019 would be appreciated.
@cabraloca : it's unfortunate but past performance is not indicative of future performance.

he is quiet since .......why?....I have more than 50 K in this Darwin. But i am going out, he is gambling

 

[funkymonkey]

Well, to a certain extent, if he's following his strategy and letting his algo do the work without much intervention, there probably isn't much to talk about.

My understanding is that there has been attempts to tweak a few parameters to improve splits as spread was getting in the way to (more) profits. For the rest, the strategy is unchanged.

That said, what I'd love to understand more (even just to satisfy my curiosity) is that @okcm2019 states that the underperformance is due to a lower volatility in the forex market and his algo works better when there is higher volatility.
I'm then wondering what drives forex volatility. I see that indeed, the volatility seems low these last months despite the geopolitical tensions in Ukraine and middle east and despite Japan central bank not being really aligned with ECB and Fed. But then, if that's not enough uncertainty to drive volatility, I'm starting to think that volatility will not be greater next year and does that then mean performance of JTL will stay similar?

On a side note, I understand your frustrations @cabraloca . I have an even higher exposure than you and entered at the worst time (oct. Last year) but all things considered, -2.5% is reasonable on what stays a risky asset. Given the bonds rate at the moment, I'm actually thinking of diversifying a bit there. Sadly, not on darwinex.

 

[funkymonkey]

@okcm2019 : would it be possible to give your perspective? One of the reason I invested in your strategy was your open communication and this seems to be lacking lately.

It's near the end of of year and I plan on reallocating my portfolio. Your input would help.

 

[cabraloca]

@okcm2019 : would it be possible to give your perspective? One of the reason I invested in your strategy was your open communication and this seems to be lacking lately.

It's near the end of of year and I plan on reallocating my portfolio. Your input would help.

He is out of control!!!, he is Gambling!!. The investors are going out 30% less because they (we) realize what is happening.

 

[kariboo]

What happens ?
It seems the strategy is exausted and does not work anymore.

 

[cabraloca]

What happens ?
It seems the strategy is exausted and does not work anymorE.

HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE IS GAMBLING!!!!