darwin discussion | Page 103 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Trading for silver Darwin 16 replies

Elliott Waves discussion 4 replies

Euro/Dollar discussion 9 replies

Forward Testing Discussion Thread 241 replies

Attachments: darwin discussion
Exit Attachments

darwin discussion

  • #2,041
  • Apr 30, 2026 8:35am Apr 30, 2026 8:35am
Quoting Noisy
{quote} 57 EUR/month means quiet a lot of money to me as a low earning solo entrepreneur not having a secure/paid job at a big company. I could better spent it for the gym as for paying a demo account and some fancy metrics but not actually making me any money.
Quoting Noisy
{quote} I'm not afraid of losing my entire deposit because, firstly, I would hardly use any leverage, and secondly, I have a hard stop-loss order that means if, for example, my live balance dropped from 10k to 9k, I wouldn't trade any further and risk a total loss (as has often happened in the past).
You crack me up :-)
(Green Diamond) Pip Impact Member (top 1%)
  • #2,042
  • Apr 30, 2026 8:55am Apr 30, 2026 8:55am
Quoting hayseed
{quote} //----- i was not clear on that, should have said will not purchase instant type boosters...... i think it was you and maybe sampat or others changed my view on instants..... the target type are far better..... in a very real sense you are actually generating income from day 1 of a target boosters purchase...... instead of it going to you, it pays for the booster...... which is still income so to speak..... when a perfect situation comes around i will purchase a target type...... most likely the 36 month 200k.....h //------ side note........
So, in analyzing the numbers, to be paid the same as a 100K prop account at 80%, you would need $533K at 15%.
In general, it takes 15% return (10+5) in a typical 2 stage forex prop challenge, so let's look at the 15% boosters......
For $1965, you can do $500K of 3 yr, for $1255 you can do 500K for 1 yr.
IMO, the extra cost vs. the typical $500 or so for a prop challenge is WELL WORTH IT, to trade just as if it's your own personal account......
1. No payout caps
2. No consistency BS
3. No max loss
4. No daily loss
5. No trailing DD
6. Trade the news (not suggested)
7. Overnight and weekend hold
8. EAs allowed
and the big one.......FULLY REGULATED brokerage and hedge fund, therefore, no stress about getting paid.
Nothing wrong with using props and Darwinex, as I and a few others do. However, if you are truly looking for long term sustainability, Darwinex MUST be part of your portfolio.
  • #2,043
  • Apr 30, 2026 9:01am Apr 30, 2026 9:01am
Quoting codemaster75
{quote} {quote} You crack me up :-)
Yes. I should have been clearer; recurring monthly costs are more of a burden than a one-time investment.

Anyhow I’ll now keep the current Darwin as a monthly subscription at least until the end of the year and think about linking the classic account to a new/second Darwin.
  • #2,044
  • Apr 30, 2026 5:51pm Apr 30, 2026 5:51pm
Quoting pipmaster77
. Nothing wrong with using props and Darwinex, as I and a few others do. .
//----

absolutely....... i still have my 20 apex accounts, 3/4's are 300k...... just try to make a few hundred a day.....if it takes me months to cross over the payout buffer, big deal..... i can wait.....

i have been looking into your and sampat's idea about the smaller boosters....... there is far more value in them than i thought......

if we overlook the 5% target, and i do, it works out to about 15$ a month for 36 months......

should be able to make at least 150 a month on 50k, which would be 10 times your cost...... and i'd bet there will be at least 1 month in that 36 where you fully cover the cost.....

going to test them out next month.....

where else can you make 10 times your money..... i just shake my head in disbelief.....h
//-----
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot 2026-04-30 173724.png Size: 53 KB
to trade and code, keep both simple... no call to impress....h
  • #2,045
  • May 1, 2026 6:33am May 1, 2026 6:33am
Quoting hayseed
if we overlook the 5% target, and i do, it works out to about 15$ a month for 36 months.
Yes, you need a 7.33% return on the 50k 5% target booster to cover the costs of $550. Over 36 months, that would mean 0.20% per month. I'm thinking of buying a 25k 36k booster but without target return, just to see how it works. With the 10% discount I received, it would cost me €409.50 instead of €445. I would need a 10.7% return to cover the costs, or 0.30% per month.

With my investment account I'm currently up +2.83 % return (≈280 EUR). I'm invested in CFZ and JHOA and using 1.5x leverage.
  • #2,046
  • Edited 9:44pm May 2, 2026 10:40am | Edited 9:44pm
Darwinex Labs have a Strategy Classification for selecting Darwins for INDX capital investment defined (from greater to lower importance) below as:
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: DWX_StrategyClassification.png Size: 10 KB

##########################################
Edit: Picture is a bit hard to read so it says this:

1) Track Record Longevity
2) Loss Aversion Profile
3) Trend Orientation (Trend-following, against the trend or neutral)
4) Key Asset Class Correlation Exposure (Indices, gold, crypto...)
5) Strategy Discipline and Consistency
6) Strategy Execution Type (Algorithmic, discretional or mix)
7) INDX Drawdown Correlation
8) Risk Management Stability
##########################################

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I wonder why INDX Drawdown Correlation is 2nd last?
(Green Diamond) Pip Impact Member (top 1%)
  • #2,047
  • May 3, 2026 4:34am May 3, 2026 4:34am
Quoting codemaster75
Darwinex Labs have a Strategy Classification for selecting Darwins for INDX capital investment defined (from greater to lower importance) below as: {image} ########################################## Edit: Picture is a bit hard to read so it says this: 1) Track Record Longevity 2) Loss Aversion Profile 3) Trend Orientation (Trend-following, against the trend or neutral) 4) Key Asset Class Correlation Exposure (Indices, gold, crypto...) 5) Strategy Discipline and Consistency 6) Strategy Execution Type (Algorithmic, discretional or mix) 7) INDX Drawdown...
Probably less important since the correlation is already minimized by an index that represents many Darwins.
  • #2,048
  • May 4, 2026 2:15am May 4, 2026 2:15am
Quoting Noisy
{quote} Probably less important since the correlation is already minimized by an index that represents many Darwins.
Not if they're all-trading Gold and Nasdaq it's not :-)
(Green Diamond) Pip Impact Member (top 1%)
  • #2,049
  • Edited 4:22am May 4, 2026 3:59am | Edited 4:22am
Here is a picture of today's Darwinex INDX:
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: INDX_20260504.png Size: 39 KB

As you can see it looks like it is in a pretty big drawdown at the moment (given history). By my calculations it was down (327.39-283.74)/327.39 = 43.65/327.39 = 13.3%.

Would this drawdown of been a lot smaller if "7) INDX Drawdown Correlation" was at least number 3?

It will be interesting to see if in future these big drawdowns become more frequent given the low priority of INDX Drawdown Correlation!
Especially if they increase the max capacity to 100 million:-)
(Green Diamond) Pip Impact Member (top 1%)
  • #2,050
  • May 4, 2026 7:14am May 4, 2026 7:14am
Quoting codemaster75
Here is a picture of today's Darwinex INDX: {image} As you can see it looks like it is in a pretty big drawdown at the moment (given history). By my calculations it was down (327.39-283.74)/327.39 = 43.65/327.39 = 13.3%. Would this drawdown of been a lot smaller if "7) INDX Drawdown Correlation" was at least number 3? It will be interesting to see if in future these big drawdowns become more frequent given the low priority of INDX Drawdown Correlation! Especially if they increase the max capacity to 100 million:-)

I believe your figure of 13.3% is incorrect? The maximum drawdown is still listed as -12.27%.

Based on the all-time chart of the INDX, this took place from January 22, 2025 (peak: +220,48%) to March 11, 2025 (through: +181,17%).

Drawdown: -12.27%
Duration: 49 days

The new all-time high was reached on January 28, 2026 (peak: +327,39%), and since then it has been in a drawdown to the current lowest point on April 27, 2026 (through: +283,74%).

Drawdown: -10,21 %
Duration: 90 days

So the recent drawdown period is not the highest, but it has already lasted almost twice as long.
  • #2,051
  • May 4, 2026 8:02am May 4, 2026 8:02am
Quoting Noisy
{quote} I believe your figure of 13.3% is incorrect?
I agree that my figure of 13.3% is incorrect, I need to add 100 to all values in my calculations, so:

(427.39-383.74)/427.39 = 43.65/427.39 = 10.21%

That's still big given the history and doesn't change my question about INDX Drawdown Correlation.
(Green Diamond) Pip Impact Member (top 1%)
  • #2,052
  • May 4, 2026 8:13am May 4, 2026 8:13am
Quoting codemaster75
{quote} I agree that my figure of 13.3% is incorrect, I need to add 100 to all values in my calculations, so: (427.39-383.74)/427.39 = 43.65/427.39 = 10.21% That's still big given the history and doesn't change my question about INDX drawdown correlation.
Based on the current return of +295%, I believe a maximum drawdown of -10% or even -12% is still very good and represents less volatility/risk than if you had invested directly in any stock index or similar instrument over the same period. That's over 24 times the return versus risk. Whether a higher weighting of the correlation in Darwin's the INDX is built from would result in fewer or shorter drawdowns, who knows.
  • #2,053
  • May 4, 2026 8:25am May 4, 2026 8:25am
Question: Which investments would have achieved a better risk-reward result from June 2020 to today than a return of +295% with a maximum decline of -12.27%?

To answer this properly, we need to translate your benchmark into risk-adjusted terms, not just returns:

  1. Return: +295% (≈ 3.95x total capital) since June 2020
  2. Max drawdown: -12.27%

That combination is extremely strong. Most investors focus on return alone, but your constraint implies something much more rare:

high CAGR + unusually shallow drawdown
A quick way to interpret it is via a simplified Calmar-style profile:

  1. Very rough CAGR over ~5.5 years ≈ 28–32% annually
  2. Max drawdown only -12%
  3. That implies a very high return per unit of pain, far above most public benchmarks

What actually beats this risk–reward profile?
We can separate the universe into 3 buckets:

1) Institutional quant / algorithmic strategies (rare but real)
These are the only consistent candidates that sometimes exceed your profile.
From empirical research:

  1. Some crypto trend-following / adaptive systems achieved:

    1. Sharpe ~2.4
    2. Max drawdown ~-12%
    3. Annualized returns ~25%+


That’s already in your neighborhood—but slightly lower return than your +295% total.
Also:

  1. Deep-learning / hybrid quant models often target Sharpe maximization, not raw return, and can outperform broad benchmarks on risk-adjusted basis

Conclusion:
Only top-tier systematic trading systems occasionally match or slightly exceed your risk profile—but they are rare, unstable, and capacity-limited.

Side nite

2) Crypto hedge fund / market-neutral strategies (closest match class)
Crypto funds in strong regimes have shown:

  1. Sharpe ratios ~1.5–2.5
  2. Often low-to-moderate drawdowns in market-neutral setups

Some even outperform Bitcoin’s risk-adjusted return in certain regimes.
But:

  1. They usually do not sustain +295% total return with only -12% drawdown over 5+ years
  2. When they do achieve high Sharpe, returns are usually lower than pure directional exposure

Conclusion:
Better Sharpe than markets, but usually not better absolute wealth growth than your result.

3) Public markets (stocks, ETFs, diversified portfolios)
Even the best multi-asset portfolios:

  1. Sharpe: ~0.8–1.2
  2. Max drawdown: -20% to -35% typical
  3. CAGR: ~7–12%

Even aggressive equity + alternatives blends rarely exceed:

  1. 15–20% CAGR with much higher drawdowns

Conclusion:
They are nowhere close to your risk-return profile.

So what
actually
beats your +295% / -12% profile?
The honest answer:
Only a very small set of strategies might beat it:
1. Highly optimized systematic trend-following (multi-asset, leveraged)

  1. Can exceed 20–40% CAGR
  2. Sometimes similar drawdowns (~10–20%)
  3. But not stable across decades

2. Early-stage crypto directional + timing strategies

  1. Some periods produce:

    1. 300% returns
    2. low drawdowns (if timing is exceptional)


  2. But highly regime-dependent (usually breaks later)

3. Illiquidity-premium strategies (private markets, VC, distressed)

  1. Can show higher paper returns
  2. But:

    1. drawdown is hidden (illiquidity)
    2. risk is underestimated, not truly comparable


Key insight (important)
Your profile:
+295% with -12.27% drawdown
is not just “good”—it implies:

  1. Calmar ratio ≈ 2.4–2.7+
  2. That is institutional “top decile quant fund” territory

And here is the uncomfortable truth:
Strategies that beat that usually do so by either
(1) increasing risk dramatically later, or
(2) relying on unstable market regimes

Bottom line
If we restrict to real, comparable, liquid investments:

  1. Nothing consistently beats it over 2020–2026 in both return AND low drawdown
  2. Only a small set of quant / trend / crypto-systematic strategies occasionally match or slightly outperform it on a risk-adjusted basis
  3. Traditional assets (stocks, ETFs, balanced portfolios) are far below this efficiency level

If you want, I can break this down further into:

  1. “What strategy type most likely produced this performance profile?”
  2. or “What Sharpe / Calmar ratio this implies vs hedge funds”
  3. or “What would have beaten it in only return (ignoring drawdown)”

As a side note: Presumably everyone here on the forum has achieved better results in the last 5 years, but don't ask them for transparent proof of that...

  • #2,054
  • May 4, 2026 10:29am May 4, 2026 10:29am
Quoting Noisy
As a side note: Presumably everyone here on the forum has achieved better results in the last 5 years, but don't ask them for transparent proof of that...
//-----

why would you say that......

the whole point of darwin is to create a transparent record so all can see and verify...... no smoke and mirrors here......

give us time...... we soon will have 5 years record......

personally. i would never ask for proof of someone's results...... seems a waste of time...... might be better to work out my trades for next week.....

lucked up and got 65k silver allocation this month .......h
//-----

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot 2026-05-04 102547.png Size: 34 KB
to trade and code, keep both simple... no call to impress....h
  • #2,055
  • May 4, 2026 4:24pm May 4, 2026 4:24pm
dang did i screw up...... several of my latest accounts are paid qrterly...... i looked at the subscription and it said monthly...... somehow i mistook that to mean monthly payouts.....

oh well.....

i took pip's advice about having a darwin finish calibration at the first of the month... it's a forex account......

it came out of calibration at 6%....... risk multiple of 3.67....... var 1.18......

should not be correlated with other accounts..... going to really focus on trades.....

looking forward to june 1st.....h
//------

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot 2026-05-04 155434.png Size: 18 KB
to trade and code, keep both simple... no call to impress....h
  • #2,056
  • May 4, 2026 4:45pm May 4, 2026 4:45pm
Quoting hayseed
dang did i screw up...... several of my latest accounts are paid qrterly...... i looked at the subscription and it said monthly...... somehow i mistook that to mean monthly payouts..... oh well..... i took pip's advice about having a darwin finish calibration at the first of the month... it's a forex account...... it came out of calibration at 6%....... risk multiple of 3.67....... var 1.18...... should not be correlated with other accounts..... going to really focus on trades..... looking forward to june 1st.....h //------ {image}
Good result. I find it a bit of a shame that you're essentially forced to choose a monthly payout interval within 14 days. This should be possible at any time, especially since you're already paying €12 more. It's unlikely to create much additional accounting work for Darwinex.
  • #2,057
  • May 4, 2026 6:14pm May 4, 2026 6:14pm
Quoting Noisy
I find it a bit of a shame that you're essentially forced to choose a monthly payout interval within 14 days.
//-----

yeah, but it was my fault..... and who can say, a few accounts paying qrterly might be a good thing..... like having a forced savings account.....

i'm just happy for he opportunity to be paid.....h
to trade and code, keep both simple... no call to impress....h
  • #2,058
  • May 6, 2026 8:33am May 6, 2026 8:33am
My current rating is 68.3 with an overall return of 4.48% and a drawdown of -3.81%. Based on the rating calculator, I would need another 1.73% this month to reach the minimum rating of 75. The calculator indicates 4.63%, and I currently have 2.90% in May. I haven't bought a booster yet. I'll see where I stand at the end of May first.
  • #2,059
  • May 7, 2026 9:27am May 7, 2026 9:27am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} It should....and, Darwinex, with the reputation they have, I'm sure will make things right. Oanda, a heavy regulated CFTC broker, goes down on purpose, where no one can open or close trades. Tradovate, one of, if not the most used futures prop platforms goes down almost weekly. Shit happens. Reputable companies make things right.
Oanda hasn't given me problems yet, hopefully never. In the country I'm currently located, the the selection of brokers is limited.
  • #2,060
  • Edited 6:53pm May 7, 2026 6:35pm | Edited 6:53pm
Quoting Noisy
Question: Which investments would have achieved a better risk-reward result from June 2020 to today than a return of +295% with a maximum decline of -12.27%? To answer this properly, we need to translate your benchmark into risk-adjusted terms, not just returns: Return: +295% (≈ 3.95x total capital) since June 2020 Max drawdown: -12.27% That combination is extremely strong. Most investors focus on return alone, but your constraint implies something much more rare: high CAGR + unusually shallow drawdown A quick way to interpret...
a lot of strategies and trader can beat this (HFT, scalping, daytrading, swing trading, medium and longterm stockpicking, Micro/Ministocks trading regular or pre/after market, some option strategies .... and so on) .... all depends from the combination of trader (experience, knowledge,....) and strategies to create a good basket result.
i have 2800% (Time weighted return) with 4 % drawdown in this 6 years time since 2020 , but this is not a fair comparison maybe, because i do it already since 20 years.

of course this pool from a lot of traders inside INDX has a low chance to beat good single traders ... but that is not the plan/goal from this INDX, it is more for diversification and low correlation to other markets and so create different/uncorrelated cashflows .

PS: i need to correct my numbers, i did look from beginning 2020 (because of your text), but INDX is only since June 2020, so for this i have smaller numbers : 1500% win and 3% drawdown. there was the corona lockdown wins in the months before, so was of course much higher because had more time to trade and i did like to use this time at home to do a lot more trades over the day.
3 traders viewing now