Indeed. If you liked that one, then you'd like "U.S. Marshals" I think it is called. It was a kind of spinoff from the Fugitive. Or was the Fugitive movie a spinoff of the Marshalls? Heh, cannot recall. Anyways.
Oh, and #8, the most important one: 8. Is there some protection that prevents these people from setting up 5 different strategies, shutting down the 4 that did bad, and keeping open the 1 that did good, leaving you seeing only the good one, thinking wow they must have the market trading worked out!!!
Hrmm, been a while since we brought up your namesake. Time for a refresh. The markets will always be there. Take a breather! hehe.
1 and 6. In C 2, there are regular subscibers who make consistent money. The methed is to subscribe like 10 strategies and replace those which failed. Also the rule of thumb is not to subscribe a strategy less than 6 month long. 2. C2 has something called "grid", you can sort all strategies by your criteria, like how long, annual profit, drawdown, etc. 3. C 2 has an autotrade syetem to connect to developer. You connect to this system. So the developer does not know your account information. You need to pay a monthly fee to use this system. 4.You can set the rule how much of your account trade the signal.You can also instruct C2 to send you email signal instead of autotrade , or when to switch between the two. 5. They can do a good job in a few months, but not much longer. Good strategies longer than 1 year are extremely rare. Good strategies longer than 3 years are zero. 7. Drawdown is most important sign. Once you see drawdown widen, get out immediately. 8. From developer's profile you can see how many strategies he is running, how many he did in the past. But that can not stop him, because he can set up a new account with a different name.
https://collective2.com/grid Here are a few good strategies on my watchlist that are more than one year. https://collective2.com/details/135662477 https://collective2.com/details/136173633 https://collective2.com/details/134964093 https://collective2.com/details/135199024 https://collective2.com/details/132692805 https://collective2.com/details/128871252 https://collective2.com/details/132670393
Thank you so much wmwmw! A few follow-ups: 1. When you say "The method is to subscribe like 10 strategies and replace those that failed", what do you mean by "failed"? What is your definition of a fail? 2. When you say "good strategies longer than 3 years are zero" - what do you mean exactly? For example, here is one that has been around well over 3 years: https://collective2.com/details/117734561 It has over a 45% annual return, and less than a 25% max drowdown. That would be an absolute winner in my book, far far better than I could ever do! You would consider that a fail? Tough grader! I see the grid now, thanks, exactly what I needed! Interesting how your strategy, follow them and when one does bad kick it out, differs from my initial reaction as to what a good strategy might be. Putting the subscription cost aside, let's say you had 10 different strategies that produced a 50% annual return each but each had a 100% drawdown (i.e. it goes completely bust) once every 10 years. I would put equal amounts into each of those ten strategies, so if I started with $100 I would put $10 in each. In any given years, one of those is likely to go bust, so you are -$10 on that one, but also in any given year the remainders will on average gain $5 each ($10 x 50% return), or $45 totaly (9*$5). So in any given year you could expect to be up 35%. Which is hugely good in my mind, even starting with the very bad 100% drawdown percentage and (apparently) no so great 50% annual return averages (many of those strategies apparently have much, much better results). I also don't know if just sticking with the single best long-term one is the best way to go - maybe its just been luck that IT hasn't had its bust yet, and some weird set of circumstances are going to come about to cause it to bust. Maybe getting a strategy that has had HUGE (say 100%) annual returns over time, but just had a really, really bad drawdown (50% or more) is the thing to do because it has had its set of weird circumstances hit it already. But I dunno. Some of those numbers are certainly eye-popping. The thing about them being able to set up an unlimited number of accounts/strategies, then killing off the 9 out of 10 that did bad or just ok, keeping the 1 that did good, is troubling, that means that "strategy" could have just been 100% luck... Thanks so much for the help!!!
Wow I looked at those you linked wmwmw, very impressive. They lack the long term testing, but I *LOVE* how they don't tend to drop very much at all generally even when the market is tanking.