do not recommend

too many looses

Excellent trader and performance. Occasionally figures out way to adjust trade in the end to make it a winner, when things don’t go exactly as planned. Exceptional market knowledge.

Excellent trader. Has proper direction of market. Great entries and knowledgeable. Has stops when needed. Amazing performance overall.

Great trader. Has proper entries and stops. Excellent performance overall.

Quite an active strategy, rarely a quiet day, which is nice. Trader seems to mostly bet on mean reversion after strong swings, which works well most of the time since that's the more common pattern. Trader tends to double down on initial losses like a Martingale, leading to higher risk and drawdowns on bets in the wrong direction. Again that works if we get mean reversion within the normal time frame for a trade (up to a few days here). However, sometimes it's not a brief deviation but a full new trend, and then the strategy of adding leverage after initial losses really backfires, leading to large losses on a few trades. Stop margins are far too wide to contain this risk. After several months of trading my return on this strategy was negative because the few high loss trades more than wiped out the trickle of positive returns on the much less leveraged successful trades. Entry timing could also be improved, trader often jumps in right in the middle of a steep move, could wait until there is at least a sign of a change in direction. Overall the returns don't justify the risks taken, and risk goes up significantly in choppy trading, causing net negative returns over a period of several months fo me.

it won with demo and not real

JWB Stock and ETF ORB trader plays with calculated risks. The trader has had tough days but overall has performed better than S&P and has been consistent for several years. Low risk and consistent positive performance relative to S&P is what I was looking for.

The strategy description sounds like it's written by a lawyer, quoting "in the Enhanced version, underperforming positions are held with less tolerance and occasionally liquidated sooner." The key word here is "occasionally." I guess a 45% drawdown is still viewed as tolerable for this strategy. Too risky for me.

.

Risk management is very poor. Lost almost all due to a large short position held over a month, when the market went up. Recommended account size and positions would result in a margin call at the brokers I know, but still leader kept position. I adviced leader 2 times to get out, but he was confident in winning. After I left, he has reduced the position and regained some losses.

Good steady returns with minimal downside risk (especially if you set your own stoploss). I like the short term trades, so I'm not stuck holding a position if there is sharp move in the markets. This is the perfect "fire and forget" strategy.

Awesome trader.

Awesome strategy!

I participated for 3 months, and over the course of the time there were 10 trades. The model never had more than 2 losses in a row before I joined. After I joined the first 3 trades were loses. One other time there were 3 loses in a row. Of the 10 trades, 7 of them were loses. As one other review indicated, the sizing of the position was not well explained. I partly blame myself for this, because I did not research MES trade size. I found out after the first trade that 1 contract is actually a 5x position. So my investment used margin as it was 5x larger than I expected. On top of that it was a loss, so I was playing catch-up from the beginning. I respect the trade managers style to "not shoot the lights out" because it also prevented a big loss. Unfortunately it worked against me as indicated in previous paragraph. The style of the trades generally were to limit gains or losses to around 1% give or take a fractional amount. In assessing my position after 3 ".months, I realized that it would take approx 10 months to recover my losses and that does not include the monthly fee. And that assumes all trades over that time frame would be profitable. However, I do realize that I could choose to increase the sizing of the trades if the results began to improve in the next 3 months. That is a risk I just am not willing to take right now. -- maybe later I will be back. One last comment - I agree with one of the other reviews written - saying the fee should be commensurate with the size of the portfolio - not the same as the Stella 100, which is based on a higher portfolio amount. It discourages the small investor.

started out ok but zero risk management. Vendor never closed their shorts as the market ripped higher. Could work out in the end if you are extremely comfortable with very high draw downs.

After loosing 23K, the system has no more signs of life Now probably the system is no longer appealing.. so the creator abandons the system with no communication.. And C2 lets all this stuff happen

Excellent strategy. He consistently brings profit to his clients with good risk management.. Very good trader with very balanced mind set.

Very poor…lost 20 k… and no sense of stop loss.

Not good compared to other peers. Win rate is less compared to Loss. After paying the commission and fees not worth continuing.

Very good trader with very balanced mind set. He knows what he is doing.

Reduced from 3 stars to 1 star. No communication. Non existent stop-losses. Keeps doubling down on a losing short side bet and adds to losses.

Death by a thousand cuts, zero communication from trade leader. Look carefully at trade record to see how easy it can be with options to hide adding to losing positions.

The strategy works better in trending markets. It has not responded very well on this bumpy and volatile market now. It's becoming unattractive for small accounts (like mine , ~25k) with a monthly subscription of $98. It's unreasonable to me that strategy manager charges the same amount for 50 Plus and 500 Plus when clearly account sizes on those strategies will be different. I suggest to reduce monthly subscription for the 50 Plus for a better chance on small account owners.

Long entry points are good, but short entry points are not. The short side conviction and hence the position size's are larger creating big whipsaw's and drawdowns. It was a stable strategy before, but not anymore.