So why would you go to a broker that has no insurance, no regulator, and worse trading conditions?
We are talking about a strategy that has 40+ pips average TP so it's not broker sensitive and even if it would be there are better brokers that have 0 spread on major pairs, therefore he could trade on bigger and safer brokers.
you are right at first sentence i mentioned. so why investors would go to there? why they go there and then complain?
vfsc is 'no regulator' you think? let's discuss which regulator is good for you and why? because i think they are all the same, one country or another, what's the difference? its just our personal feeling who do we trust and that's all
if brokers have 0 spread, how they earn? how they can be possibly honest giving 0 spread? paying money for mql license (as you mentioned earlier), paying for everything just to give a platform, website, etc and how this a-book brokers earn?
Yes, you can trust the UK (FCA), EU (ESMA, FINMA), Australia (ASIC) and USA (CFTC, NFA) those are proper regulators, that you can trust. All the rest are not properly monitored and therefore the broker under such 'regulators' are just on paper, no audit, no visits nothing to protect traders in such jurisdictions.
How does a broker earn if they offer 0 spread? Easily they charge commissions... You can also reduce the cost of commission if you use rebate programs. But just to know brokers pay about 5$ per 1 million and they charge us 5-7$ per 100k, so here is how they get paid... On standard account, the spread is 0.5-2 pips and there is again how they get paid. Brokers always get paid, the difference is if they overcharge and widen the spread in their favor and cheat against you. Hard to prove, but if you trade for a long time you can and you can complain only to proper regulators, they will at least investigate.