• 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

Is it me, or do these darwins have really poor performances nowadays? JTL new maximum drawdown recently, PUL new maximum drawdown recently, YKA new maximum drawdown recently, TRO new maximum drawdown recently, BSX new maximum drawdown recently, SYO serious drawdown, EPG serious drawdown... I'm not invested in all of these, and luckily I scaled back in time (especially the ones with no skin in the game: I also realized this rule...), but this is just painful. Something changed in the last year in the markets, and these amateur strategies just don't work anymore (especially with the very substantial investment fees, you just get nothing in the end, and even bear the losses). 2022 spring was the last profitable period, and 2/3 of those profits are now vanished in this huge drawdown. I just don't see the point of this darwin portfolio investing anymore: maybe I can expect 3% a year from this, but it is a very risky 3%... Bonds are just better in every way: bonds are risk-free, and I get even more return from them (which is ridiculous, but true). If you don't have access to trading strategies like Renaissance Technologies has, you just shouldn't be in the markets - and these amateur strategies are very-very far from this. After the fees to the traders and Darwinex, not very much is left on the table, if any. What are your opinions? Are darwin portfolios dead, or is it just a very unlucky period?

I see 3 issues/questions investing in darwins / darwin portfolios:

1. You just don't have enough information to pick the right darwins. Okay, 3+ years track record: and what's from that? That is maybe 0.1% of the information you could get from thoroughly backtesting the strategy (with sensitivity analyses, Monte Carlo method, etc.). So, the public information about the darwins is just nothing compared to what you could do if you owned the strategy and made your own backtests. You sell, buy and trade darwins, and build optimized portfolios from them: these are just some ridiculous illusions, you just cannot do these from the publicly available data of the trading strategies.

2. 20% performance fees, right? Well, the strategies go into drawdown after you paid, and you don't get back your paid money. Currently, it seems like I paid as much performance fees as my overall profits, so the performance fees seem like 50%. SOME traders may just go after these performance fees: their strategy is not even profitable anymore, but because of how this performance fee system works, he is able to make money from the investors. I think the performance fees should be untouched for at least a year, and investors should get back their money if these drawdowns happen: this would be a much fair system. Of course, this will never be the way.

3. Investing in drawdowns is another illusion in my opinion. Predicting a trading strategy from its past is impossible in my view - or it would be included in the strategy itself. Moreover, investing in drawdowns seems to be a martingale strategy to me: you increase the leverage if the strategy loses. What is it if not martingale?

So, all in all, I'm very disappointed in trading strategy investing, and I genuinely believe, a 2-3% annual return is the maximum one can make investing in darwin portfolios in the long run (and this 2-3% is with serious drawdowns, stress, etc). Absolutely not worth it. I spent 1.5+ years investing, put in a lot of effort, and made very little money. At least I see the reality of this fairytale.

I would like to express my respect for "Andras0503" and wholeheartedly agree with the points raised in this post.

  1. Constructing a profitable Darwin portfolio post-investment can be extremely challenging. While the backtest tool may suggest high potential profitability, it's crucial to recognize the significant survivorship bias present on the Darwinex platform. Successful Darwins often endure substantial drawdowns, and selecting based solely on past performance can lead to future losses.
  2. The asymmetry in profit and loss is detrimental to net profit and loss. For instance, if we invest in two Darwins—one yielding a 10% return incurring a 20% performance fee and the other losing 10%—the net result is a zero return, yet investors bear the full loss. Additionally, management fees are applicable regardless of performance. My experience indicates that combined management and performance fees can exceed 50% of gross returns, meaning investors do not truly receive the anticipated 80%.
  3. Many Darwins are managed by amateur traders or small teams, making it challenging to outperform established professional firms or hedge funds. The only viable approach to constructing a potentially profitable Darwin portfolio appears to be a highly selective strategy focusing on qualified Darwins. However, even one or two underperforming Darwins can significantly erode overall profits.
Investors should exercise caution when considering investments in Darwins. If you choose to explore this avenue, I recommend starting with a small investment or utilizing a demo account.
 
Well, I disagree with @Andras0503. I think the trader is blamed for not providing sufficient profits when in most cases it is the investor himself who is responsible for his poor results. Because he expects impossible returns and because he does not understand that an investment should be measured in the long term.

I'm going to do a very simple exercise. In @Andras0503 post he mentions a list of 7 Darwins. That post from where he was complaining about how terrible traders are and little else that this is a hoax because all the Darwins were in Drawdown he specifically and bitterly cited; JTL, PUL, YKA, TRO, BSX, SYO, EPG.

Ok, let's look at that list of losers, selected by that investor. What is their 2024 cumulative return TODAY:
JTL 9%, PUL 0%, YKA -11%, TRO 9%, BSX -10%, SYO 4%, EPG 25%.

Well wow, I hope for @Andras0503's sake that he held his Darwins portfolio, because if he didn't hold it he will have made the mistake typical of most investors. Lack of patience.

I am not an investor, I am a trader. But in my opinion the investor's job is to analyze the Darwin and the trader. Once the decision is made, follow through to the end.
 
Well, I disagree with @Andras0503. I think the trader is blamed for not providing sufficient profits when in most cases it is the investor himself who is responsible for his poor results. Because he expects impossible returns and because he does not understand that an investment should be measured in the long term.

I'm going to do a very simple exercise. In @Andras0503 post he mentions a list of 7 Darwins. That post from where he was complaining about how terrible traders are and little else that this is a hoax because all the Darwins were in Drawdown he specifically and bitterly cited; JTL, PUL, YKA, TRO, BSX, SYO, EPG.

Ok, let's look at that list of losers, selected by that investor. What is their 2024 cumulative return TODAY:
JTL 9%, PUL 0%, YKA -11%, TRO 9%, BSX -10%, SYO 4%, EPG 25%.

Well wow, I hope for @Andras0503's sake that he held his Darwins portfolio, because if he didn't hold it he will have made the mistake typical of most investors. Lack of patience.

I am not an investor, I am a trader. But in my opinion the investor's job is to analyze the Darwin and the trader. Once the decision is made, follow through to the end.
You wrote about a measurement in the long term.

If you take January 2nd, 2024 as start date, it looks good - as a portfolio built from these Darwins is recovering from a 30% Drawdown since January 2nd, 2023. Your timing takes a lucky snapshot, if you start a year earlier, it is the opposite.

You can easily play the with a backtest - use leverage x4 to show it more dramatically:

1727527046377.png


The portfolio did not fully recover since beginning of 2023.

The reason are the fees, in such cases mainly the management fee and not the performance fees.

As you see in Q4/2023, the portfolio result of 30% loss is worse than any single Darwin's result.
Who can seriously tell an investor to stay in a losing portfolio with more than 20% losses?

Since beginning of 2022 this composition had an ATH of nearly 48% end of September 2022 which was never reached since.

1727527010554.png


The key challenges of a Darwin investment is not solved:
- identify a Darwin on the existing data which is worth to start an investment
- identify a Darwin position on the existing data which is to sell to keep profit
 
You wrote about a measurement in the long term.

If you take January 2nd, 2024 as start date, it looks good - as a portfolio built from these Darwins is recovering from a 30% Drawdown since January 2nd, 2023. Your timing takes a lucky snapshot, if you start a year earlier, it is the opposite.

You can easily play the with a backtest - use leverage x4 to show it more dramatically:

View attachment 337766

The portfolio did not fully recover since beginning of 2023.

The reason are the fees, in such cases mainly the management fee and not the performance fees.

As you see in Q4/2023, the portfolio result of 30% loss is worse than any single Darwin's result.
Who can seriously tell an investor to stay in a losing portfolio with more than 20% losses?

Since beginning of 2022 this composition had an ATH of nearly 48% end of September 2022 which was never reached since.

View attachment 337765

The key challenges of a Darwin investment is not solved:
- identify a Darwin on the existing data which is worth to start an investment
- identify a Darwin position on the existing data which is to sell to keep profit

Nice analysis!
Either way I think it still proves my point. Which is; Investment is a long term game. Since 2022 you'd have had a 30% profit aprox. Not bad.

The portfolio suffered a serious Drawdown of 30%. So what? I think 30% is something acceptable on any investment instrument. Now it looks recovering

There's something more to say here. 2023 has been quite a bizarre year. A lot of good Darwins have had a bad performance on 2023. I don't know exactly why. So probably including 2023 makes look the numbers worse than average.

I insist, I'm not an investor. I'm just trying to say that I suspect that an investor could have better results once he/she has choosen his Darwin provider (probably more important that the Darwin itself). Being patient and leting the others do the work for you. Kind of like the buy and hold strategy.
 
There's something more to say here. 2023 has been quite a bizarre year. A lot of good Darwins have had a bad performance on 2023. I don't know exactly why. So probably including 2023 makes look the numbers worse than average.
The problem is that an investor who had made an investment since 2022 or beginning 2023 can't dash 2023 from his portfolio or performance. The money is gone - at least for the fees.

The composition discussed here as an example made 48% until September 2022 and 40% until end of 2022.

Both dates would be a good moment to leave with really nice profit and go for new investments.

The challenge is
- find criteria to leave a successful investment in time
- find criteria for alternatives to invest in new Darwins which were successful in 2023 as none of the composition above made net profit in 2023

The management fee looks small with 1.2 % per year, but with an x4 leverage that is 4.8% per year taken from the deposit.
As management fee is taken pro rata daily, it might be better for investors if Darwinex takes a higher fee (maximum doubled) for winning days and nothing for losing days or days without trading.
That would smooth the DD in 2023 in this example.
 
Last edited:
Derived from beacktests, a good combination for 7 Darwins could have been for the last 3 years, starting beginning of October of each year.
As Darwinex offers only x3 levarage for new demo portfolios, I also use this leverage here.

about 46.29% in one year from October 1st, 2021 until October 1st, 2022 with x3 leverage:
1728049781741.png


about 46.86% in one year from October 1st, 2022 until October 1st, 2023 with x3 leverage:
1728049951577.png


about 54,62% in one year from October 1st, 2023 until October 1st, 2024 with x3 leverage:
1728050089209.png


Don't forget, backtests only show survivers.

Inspired from this discussion, I built a new demo portfolio en of September 2024 here.
 
Top