Forum: Collective2 Suggestions, Feedback, Questions
| |
| Subject: | Gen1 vs Gen3 delays |
| Posted by: | joe black |
 |
| |
|
| When: | 1/27/12 (23:52) | |
|
|
|
|
| | Matthew,
I saw in a closed form thread between Sergey Groshunov (Stock's fundementals) and yourself, where you inferred that Gen1 AutoTrade subscribers are at a disadvantage as far as obtaining comparable fills that a Gen3 subscriber might expect. You lead one to believe that Gen1 endorsers have delays in fills that Gen3 participants do not, and thus, this contributes to data peculiarity. Would you explain in laymen's terms what all of this means? I have used both Gen1 and Gen3 platforms and have found advantages and drawbacks to both.
Joe |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
What is the C2 Score?
Collective2 rates every trading advisor in its database and assigns a score between 100 and 1000.
In general, a rating above 500 is good. A rating above 700 is excellent.
Collective2 Ratings are recalculated daily based on the entire performance history in our database. The exact formula we use is proprietary, but there are several key variables that go into the Collective2 Rating. One of the most important factors is the length of time we have been able to observe the performance of the trader. Another key factor is the amount by which the trader over-performs or under-performs the S&P 500 index. Finally, the choppiness of the trader's results is taken into account. Certainly a more consistent trader will be rated more highly than a trader with erratic results.
