• Welcome to the Darwinex Forums, these forums are member-run and managed by CavaliereVerde. Member-run forum rules may differ from the site guidelines.

Darwinex: the good , the bad and the ugly

When ignacio was in charge there have never been delisted discussions, closed discussions, machine gun flags.
Than making a good impression to some misterious reader became the priority...
Unfortunatelly in a forum the company doesn't control the visibility of discussions.
 
Last edited:
The real problem has never been discussing darwins.
They don't want customers to openly and publicly discuss their work and their policies.
Expert users reproaching their failures and their promisses prevented big investors to join.
 
Last edited:
Moderator,please put all my posts together:64 and 65 belong with the rest and are introductory.Than you will have to find better title for new thread to encompass what I am trying to show and how I will wrap all together in the end.
It will be useful for new investors.
 
Hi,
I'm new on this forum though I've been enjoying following you guys, silently on Darwinex forum and now on this one, if you allow me I'll share my 2cents because these late movements on Darwinex seem disturbing to me. BTW I'm a 'new' customer. Two Darwins, the first one since January 2020.

As most of you I suppose, I've been captivated by the Darwinex message. A decent broker, low cost, not the cheapest though, provides its historical data; that by itself proves a lot! And on top of that the Darwin concept where "you get paid to trade" - as they say; highly marketing statement but it's Ok, they have to sell themselves. They provide the legal hedge to get capital from investors doing everything properly done.

However I think they are slipping to some not so appealing lands lately. I won't repeat the bad and the ugly points already mentioned before. Just add something that is probably discussed deeply on another thread - Interactive Brokers integration. From my experience, when two companies with so different sizes "integrate". One swallow the other. It's ALWAYS like that, corporate rules, world spins that way. Also, I've listened both podcasts published on YouTube; Spanish and English. I still don't see why on earth should I open account on Darwinex instead of directly on IB.
Why should I go to Darwinex and not to IB? The Darwin?? That's the only argument.
To me we're simply witnessing a take over between two companies. From our perspective, as traders, that shouldn't be bad, per se. IB is a much more sound broker. But the dream of Darwinex is vanishing somehow.

What I'd like to point out is two things:
1- Communication: They change the rules of the game with the D-Score, the 5% charge on the Darwin paid by the trader. I also noticed by myself that they make interviews with Darwins that some months later fail miserably (most of them). All together proves that they are terrible communicators.
I'm sure they are honests and they don't try to scam anybody, otherwise I'd close out my accounts on Darwinex

2- Egotism. That scares me the most though knowing that IB is behind the scenes eases me up. I'm sure that Juan Colon is a guy made by himself. I've heard several statements of him on different spanish podcasts where he speaks frankly and familiarly where you can see his egotism. I'd bet that they do what they do "por sus cojones" - sorry it's a tipical spanish expression that I don't know how to translate in English. I heard in one of his interviews that he was fed up of some criticism on the Darwinex forum and that he as CEO wouldn't discuss with silly arguments. Shortly after, the forum was announced to be closed - doesn't IB has a forum? I've seen they have some sort of private forum.
Maybe we'll end up over there with time :)
Anyways, Juan looks like a charismatric guy but also someone with a tremendous ego. This kind of people tend to not getting along with criticism and on stressful situations tend to act impulsively and I'd preffer to put my money on a more proffessional and organized company. So, again, probably we'll win on the future playing with the IB rules.

Looking at the future hopefully we'll win with the best of both brokers but we'll have to give up the original Darwinex premises.
 

@CavaliereVerde​

But I really realy like Darwinex as well . I like these spanish guys and there idea. Sorry to say, I found quite often the criticsm in there forum to hard. I am confident, that they do their best for there custumors. Concerning SocialTrading (or even PropTrading if you think of Darwinia) the best I have seen so far.
 
@TrainerTXR
Censoring negative feedback is not the best for customers.
Reducing performance fees from 20 to 15% is not the best for customers.
Closing a cummunity is not the best for customers.

I worked for free for them as moderator and community manager for 3 years.
I like Darwinex very much but I don't like to be fucked around.
I always stated what I thought, my sincere opinions.
I have never been a cheerleader and forums are not places to cheerlead but to create a knowledge base.
Twitter is more than enough to cheerlead.
 
Last edited:
I see you view and argues.
I just try to see both sides of the medal.

I think their communication concerning their pivoting and the reasons behind was very open & offensive. Much more than they needed. In the end Its their company and their decision (an they do not have to explain there internal thought at all), but they did and decided to give the information. What then comes on accusation and attacs in the forum was not okay. I always was wondering, how I would have reacted . Its their 'baby' - their life-work -

(and they are proud spanish like you are proud italian surely) - thats a dangerous constallation ...

And in the end it becomes personally - as I see. And thats never good
 
IlIlIlIlI said:
Other platforms reduced a few years earlier from 30/20/10 % to 15/10/5 %.
Click to expand...
Which platforms?
On PAMMs the trader decides the fee.
Of course it is their game and the have all the right to change the rules.
What they could do was to avoid excuses like "expanding investor base".
Customers deserve more respect.
They just needed more margin to run the business.
 
Etoro pays only if you have a certain number of subscribers. When they started there was no rule AFAIK.
Or an Austrian platfrom for example where I took the figures above.
They also added that you need a minumum amount of invested money to be eligible for commissions.
That's an advantage at Darwinex that there is no limitation for the payout.
 
CavaliereVerde said:
What they could do was to avoid excuses like "expanding investor base".
Customers deserve more respect.
Click to expand...
I completely agree with that.
They needed fresh money, the company does not belong only to the founders anymore, and I assume, their investors did not want to fund the traders with their investment.
 
Darwinex is the best but this is not a reason to worsen or to tell stories to customers.
If you start to bait and switch you become like the other casino-brokers that sell dreams.
 
It would be better for sustaining and broadening the base of investable traders to implement a scheme like eToro, where interesting traders are getting each month fixed stipend while they are waiting to be discovered by masses and properly funded. Darwinia is too opaque and unstable support for aspiring traders.Most of 'winners' don't get any measurable financial support out of it.
There are maybe 60 3-year or more native trackrecords (some algotraders have few of them),that are showing some signs of life.The rest is come and go.This can continue for another decade if darwinex doesn't give traders real incentive to persist and continue after initial 12-24 months.
A lot of collective AuM would act as a magnet and motivator,but that is not the case at the moment.
Giving a minimal wage to 50 talented traders who don't have more than 500k AuM would do the trick.Maybe somebody at darwinex will think about it after they notice stagnation continues.They should start thinking about psychology of their customers for a change.Some money would come from abandoned Darwinia and the rest should come from shareholders. 300-500k per year is too much of expense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

IlIlIlIlI
Darwinex Zero demo portfolio
Replies
0
Views
181
IlIlIlIlI
IlIlIlIlI
Sharky
Welcome Darwinex Veterans
Replies
2
Views
2K
NVP
NVP
V
James Simons, performance fees and quants
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
10K
postman
P
FXforfun
FTMO vs Darwinex
6 7 8
Replies
146
Views
24K
IlIlIlIlI
IlIlIlIlI
V
Darwinex Map // Join the wave !
2 3
Replies
46
Views
10K
CavaliereVerde
CavaliereVerde
Top