Do you know if there is a list

of brokers and the percentage of traders losing money with them?
I believe the average is about 75% but today I have seen ad for broker who advertise 86% of the traders is losing money with that broker :)
Isn't it appealing to join?

I can't remember the location but I am sure that I saw something about this on an EU page related to the new ESMA regulation

Amancio posted:
I can't remember the location but I am sure that I saw something about this on an EU page related to the new ESMA regulation

https://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=800745

ESMA has been a bit unfair as these numbers do not show the real picture behind the scenes.

They portray only the Retail trader statistics, so say in a brokerage there is 900 Clients that had €100 or less accounts and they lost their money (Highly likely scenario), and another 100 with larger Balances who have broken even/made a profit, by ESMA regulation the broker must state that 90% of traders lose money with this broker.

In another scenario a broker may have 100 professional Clients that are profitable, and only 100 or so retail traders that have lost their funds trading, this again would show that 100% traders lose money with this broker.

I believe other metrics such as Best Execution, Broker Capitalisation and reputation of broker are better gauges of broker reliability rather than the trader metrics that ESMA brokers have to show at the bottom of their websites.

L3CAP posted:
ESMA has been a bit unfair as these numbers do not show the real picture behind the scenes.

They portray only the Retail trader statistics, so say in a brokerage there is 900 Clients that had €100 or less accounts and they lost their money (Highly likely scenario), and another 100 with larger Balances who have broken even/made a profit, by ESMA regulation the broker must state that 90% of traders lose money with this broker.

In another scenario a broker may have 100 professional Clients that are profitable, and only 100 or so retail traders that have lost their funds trading, this again would show that 100% traders lose money with this broker.

I believe other metrics such as Best Execution, Broker Capitalisation and reputation of broker are better gauges of broker reliability rather than the trader metrics that ESMA brokers have to show at the bottom of their websites.

Even though you are right the number shown is very good indicator for retail trader. As I suppose the overall skill of traders is the same at ll brokers then the loss is caused by broker conditions not trader skills.

So theoretically you should be the most profitable with the broker with the lowest number of failing traders.

But what about say a broker that accepts smaller deposits by retail traders? These accounts are likely to bust and give the broker a high losing score Vs a broker who may have a larger deposit requirements and their Clients are less likely to lose with bigger Balance (And the max 30:1 leverage).

Also the leverage cap is very recent and I believe after 1 year of having max leverage 30:1, it will be harder for retail Clients to lose their money, and subsequently the scoring of broker will probably improve.

L3CAP posted:
But what about say a broker that accepts smaller deposits by retail traders? These accounts are likely to bust and give the broker a high losing score Vs a broker who may have a larger deposit requirements and their Clients are less likely to lose with bigger Balance (And the max 30:1 leverage).

Also the leverage cap is very recent and I believe after 1 year of having max leverage 30:1, it will be harder for retail Clients to lose their money, and subsequently the scoring of broker will probably improve.

Well trading small account under 1k should bring the same risk/profit as big account.
That is all the matter of risk mgmt.

togr posted:

L3CAP posted:
But what about say a broker that accepts smaller deposits by retail traders? These accounts are likely to bust and give the broker a high losing score Vs a broker who may have a larger deposit requirements and their Clients are less likely to lose with bigger Balance (And the max 30:1 leverage).

Also the leverage cap is very recent and I believe after 1 year of having max leverage 30:1, it will be harder for retail Clients to lose their money, and subsequently the scoring of broker will probably improve.

Well trading small account under 1k should bring the same risk/profit as big account.
That is all the matter of risk mgmt.

Risk Management is another subject for discussion 😄 Maybe ESMA should have been issuing circulars and directives on that!

L3CAP posted:

togr posted:

L3CAP posted:
But what about say a broker that accepts smaller deposits by retail traders? These accounts are likely to bust and give the broker a high losing score Vs a broker who may have a larger deposit requirements and their Clients are less likely to lose with bigger Balance (And the max 30:1 leverage).

Also the leverage cap is very recent and I believe after 1 year of having max leverage 30:1, it will be harder for retail Clients to lose their money, and subsequently the scoring of broker will probably improve.

Well trading small account under 1k should bring the same risk/profit as big account.
That is all the matter of risk mgmt.

Risk Management is another subject for discussion 😄 Maybe ESMA should have been issuing circulars and directives on that!

Well they tried.
As with low leverage you cannot put big trades on small account.
So in order to get good profit you need either to deposit more thus risk more
or go offshore and risk it all :)

very interesting ,thanks for this thread

Basically I avoid high voltage news sessions like NFP, FOMC! As a result, most of the time I don’t face slippage problem. No doubt, it’s an irritating issue.