I agree. It is not the site's fault that there are very few decent systems. Then again, very successfull systems magnet big money and tend to close down. It is like a Catch of 22, only mediocre systems allowed to exist for an extended time... Also, systems starting out with a bang tend to blow up, here is an example: http://www.collective2.com/cgi-perl...403799846474857886&system=30886631&usecache=1
I keep hearing that Collective2 works with trading accounts. Do they work with real money brokers, simulators or both? Pekelo and Worldcrusher would be the best to answer this considering they have used or are using Collective2. Mark
I autotraded a few on a paper account with mixed results during a trial period -- was curious about how it all worked. Would I use a blackbox system regularly? Probably not -- and I'm not using one now. Bottom line, there is no black box solution - if a system works today it may not work next week, and C2 subscribers need to realize that and control their risk accordingly, because if the system owner doesn't modify his settings/style, they're going to get screwed. Though I do think the C2 folks make it VERY clear on numerous occasions the need to manage and understand the risks -- to their credit, they are very upfront about reminding subscribers to know what they're doing before going live with real money. That was very refreshing to see, IMO.
The accounts that system vendors trade on C2 (and whose performance is shown on the site) are sim accounts - they are not real. If you subscribe to a system on C2 you can either trade the signals manually or you auto-trade a real account using different mechanisms depending on the broker. I do think that it is a problem that a C2 system vendor can walk away from their failed systems or just create a whole new persona and start from scratch when they blow out. You say that a wise investor should only seek out vendors with longevity on C2 however there are very few successful long-term vendors on C2 because the good ones get betters offers outside of C2 so what you are left with is lots of new systems/vendors and a few 'mature' vendors with unremarkable systems. How much time is enough time to judge someone's performance? Does the system called Hawk-Fx ring any bells? The bottom line is that the vendors aren't risking anything on C2 (except possibly their reputation, if they choose to use their real name). If their system starts to underperform many just martingale or start over-leveraging. If they luck out they look like geniuses, if they blow-out, oh well, it wasn't their money on the line so who cares. Would you want to auto-trade a system in such a situation? C2 has a lot of promise but so far I have been pretty disappointed with the actual results and I've been on the site a long time.
C2 has an autotrade feature that works with a specific group of real money brokers. This list is also about to expand from what I understand. I do not see why it would not work with simulated accounts if the entries were made manually by the trader. Sincerely, Daryl
GTS, You bring up some good points that are very popular views. I believe I already addressed the issue of account blowouts and traders starting new accounts so I won't beat that dead horse. However, your point about the good systems leaving C2 does not account for those traders who simply do not want to manage money. Investors can be a headache and many traders just want to trade. C2 makes that possible. Also, there are amateur traders out there that do not wish to make trading their life and some of them have excellent systems. Also, I can tell you from my own experience that attracting capital to start a hedge fund is very difficult. As I mentioned, my system has been posted 10 months and realistically, it will probably be years more before it ever attracts interests, if it ever does. So even though my system is a strong, consistent performer, I don't anticipate leaving C2 anytime soon. How much time is enough time to judge someone's performance? That is for each investor to decide. But I believe that if an investor analyzes enough systems and compares them, he/she will get a feel for how long that should be. You go on to say that "The bottom line is that the vendors aren't risking anything on C2 (except possibly their reputation, if they choose to use their real name)." Well, reputation is everything in this game and I do use my real name. Also, C2 assigns scores and those scores reflect the strength of a system and its developer. Starting anew will reset and lower those scores. I think that your disappointment with C2 is understandable and that you are right in saying that the majority of systems on the site can lose investors some real money. Once again, I think you bring up some great points. I would suggest looking for systems that produce a gently and steadily rising equity curve over an acceptable period of time. As a filter, this will eliminate a great many systems. Sincerely, Daryl
I completely agree. Good idea, but eventually the site depends on the existence of good traders. C2 itself is just a platform (just like ET) and without vendors with excellent systems (or ET without good posters) it is just that, a platform with nice whistles and bells. The real content comes from the users... Now let's mention that there is a new feature, the "Trade the opposite of the signal" where you can take the exact opposite positions than what the vendor took. Based on the fact that most systems are unprofitable and even several of the highflyers blow up, this could be an interesting feature to try....
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. You do appear to be the real deal and therefore retract my previous over-reaching generalization that there are no "Pro traders" at C2 which was more directed to the matter-of-fact attitude of the OP that you can just pick any systems at C2 and let the pro's trade your account, as if talented traders and successful systems are plentiful there. The only point I would like to re-iterate is that (as far as I know) no verification of identity at C2. Therefore I could create a C2 persona of Jack McCoy, create a LinkedIn profile with the same name, create my own blog, etc - use it as long as my system is successful but if problems arise I could just disappear leaving my subscribers scratching their heads and counting their losses. In other words caveat emptor.