That 45% is with the historical data (not even including 2008). There's nothing to say that in the future it couldn't be worse. Imagine putting all your money in right before that kind of drawdown. How long would it take to even break even again? How consistent is the algo? Are you getting those 100+% returns every year? Or does it depend on a few idiosyncratic events to boost the returns (which would suggest overfitting). I think there are a lot of things to consider, and historical returns is just one. It can be misleading.
I already have quite a few algos that would pay for a time machine if could just work out the paradox and get back to 2006 to invest in them.
I'd work on evening out the results and make sure the algo continues to perform out-of-sample. I'd consider combining this strategy with another that doesn't share its same weakness.