Thanks for the info. I will abide by those parameters. One thing further...I noticed your mention of fees and the trading parameters at IB. Yet you have failed too mention my return using IB fees is +35%.
It always will, algofy. The higher your risk/reward ratio is (e.g., 2:1 -> reward : risk), the lower your win % will be in the long-term. The relationship between those two variables is indirect. I've only seen two instances of dislocations where the numbers can appear to "defy" the math for some time: in the crazy world of penny stocks and at the height of bubbles like the dotcom ('98-'00).
Problem is slippage, as you are using paper trading account and not live trading a real account, C2 cannot track your order slippage properly. Therefore i think the $14 C2 deduct from each trade is a good estimate for total transaction costs: commissions + slippage. Especially for your followers who will have even more slippage than you do.
It is obvious you are checking the C2 cumulative stats currently. I am okay with that. Those stats will only get better with time. But you should also include a check of the account statistics and raw values. The weekly stat is simply a look at weekly performance. It is interesting too some.
Once he gets real-money auto-traders, C2 will be able to track/include slippage as it happens in those real money auto-traders' accounts.
Do C2 allow auto traders to follow a paper trader? Or must the trader being followed be live trading as well?
I am in agreement Mr. Southall. All C2 uses the C2 computation. I will meet my objective using those parameters. Slippage is present in all trading. I think, as you mentioned previously, the $14 considers slippage.
Of the top 25 traders listed currently, i think 2 or 3 trade live accounts. Most subscribers on c2 follow paper traders in their live brokerage accounts.