I think because of the big DD in 2019. The same situation of AZG of @ASGTrade.
But, keep the same performance, sooner or later, it will find spot light.
-
Welcome to the Darwinex Forums, these forums are member-run and managed by CavaliereVerde. Member-run forum rules may differ from the site guidelines.
But, keep the same performance, sooner or later, it will find spot light.
I would call it a realistic drawdawn.
It is not a coincidence that members of the forum rely on darwinia,
We were speaking also about PUL and VRT ...
Investors are more focused on farmed grails.
A lucky trackrecord of one year works better than a realistic trackrecord of 3 years.
It is not a coincidence that members of the forum rely on darwinia,
We were speaking also about PUL and VRT ...
Investors are more focused on farmed grails.
A lucky trackrecord of one year works better than a realistic trackrecord of 3 years.
Last edited:
As @CavaliereVerde noticed sarcastically,Darwinia buys highs(allocates darwins when they are on high points or when bad darwins are having sharp monthly pullback(upwards) on their way down). Exactly the opposite of what I recommend in this thread.
If Darwinex were suicidal,they would invest real money into Darwinia winners.The results are so bad,that they don't want to publish them for Darwinia winners.They have all data needed and powerful computers.It would be easy to present the results over the years.
In fact,they had to put in red the warning for investors not to take Darwinia rankings seriously.While in the same breath assuring traders that their algorithms are really rewarding best traders who will bring good results medium-term
.
And then they make a complete U-turn and on marketing pages of individual darwins (example from SYO page) show prominently Darwinia rankings and allocations as an incentive for investors to trust such competitive darwin.
See for yourself:
If Darwinex were suicidal,they would invest real money into Darwinia winners.The results are so bad,that they don't want to publish them for Darwinia winners.They have all data needed and powerful computers.It would be easy to present the results over the years.
In fact,they had to put in red the warning for investors not to take Darwinia rankings seriously.While in the same breath assuring traders that their algorithms are really rewarding best traders who will bring good results medium-term
.And then they make a complete U-turn and on marketing pages of individual darwins (example from SYO page) show prominently Darwinia rankings and allocations as an incentive for investors to trust such competitive darwin.
See for yourself:
Moderator,I made a mistake.Last post belongs to thread Darwinex results and suggestions...
Let's speak different subjects in different topics.
This is the topic about Darwnia.
So your criticism vs darwinia is better here.
Darwinia is not a suggestion an by the way is working better than the crowd of investors.
Darwnia is a clear loser but investors are losing more than Darwinia.
If Darwnia were a winner they would have turned into a public DWEX 3 years ago.
Darwnia is not designed to win money but despite it it behaves better than the average investor, on average allocation is stacking on good darwins.
This is the topic about Darwnia.
So your criticism vs darwinia is better here.
Darwinia is not a suggestion an by the way is working better than the crowd of investors.
Darwnia is a clear loser but investors are losing more than Darwinia.
If Darwnia were a winner they would have turned into a public DWEX 3 years ago.
Darwnia is not designed to win money but despite it it behaves better than the average investor, on average allocation is stacking on good darwins.
It is clearly showed in my post it is meant to find darwins who will win in medium-term.
They use it in marketing efforts for investors not only traders,as I have shown as an example for SYO.The difference is Darwinex invests demo,investors go in with real money
.Dwex1,2... and other their attempts were trading darwins like dumb money:in and out frequently...No wonder there was no success.
Darwinia is not a winner not because the logic is flawed but because it is allocating more than 200 darwins, many of them are just lucky mokeys.
The goal is to reach the talented ones not to avoid the lucky.
It is insanely difficult to avoid lucky traders.
The goal is to reach the talented ones not to avoid the lucky.
It is insanely difficult to avoid lucky traders.
I like new darwin individual pages, pretty informative.
But I don't like to see darwinia allocation named as "commitment" or "proprietary capital".
Back in 2016 allocation was summed to real money of investors, there was a lot of right criticism and it was separated.
So it is a step back.
Darwinia is tha main tool to speed up the selection of good traders and it is very smart but it is not a proof that they are investing darwins.
But I don't like to see darwinia allocation named as "commitment" or "proprietary capital".
Back in 2016 allocation was summed to real money of investors, there was a lot of right criticism and it was separated.
So it is a step back.
Darwinia is tha main tool to speed up the selection of good traders and it is very smart but it is not a proof that they are investing darwins.
Last edited:
The real point with Darwinia is not winning the allocation but growing the allocation after being prized.
Making a new high in 6 months is pretty realistic while investors pretend new highs every month and that is the reason of several collapses: gambling to please investors
Making a new high in 6 months is pretty realistic while investors pretend new highs every month and that is the reason of several collapses: gambling to please investors
Maybe I don't understand this sentence correctly,so forgive me ,but I think traders are trying to stack(your expression) multiple Darwinia allocations.That is worse than trying to have every month in green to please impatient investors.
Morning Guy's
so I took a statistical look at the Top10 Darwins in any given month in DarwinIA. It's quite bad, to be fair I only looked at a 12 month period from time of allocation. I'm still trying to figure out why results are this bad. But see for yourself.
so I took a statistical look at the Top10 Darwins in any given month in DarwinIA. It's quite bad, to be fair I only looked at a 12 month period from time of allocation. I'm still trying to figure out why results are this bad. But see for yourself.
Last edited:
Trading is very hard. Winning some notional allocation won't magically make you or your strategy better. In fact, it can bring out the worst in undisciplined traders. There's a reason why there are over 4,000 Darwins but only around 80 have made >50% returns. That number will fall even further if you remove iffy migrations.
