Dec 03 2018 at 15:54
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 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
Dec 04 2018 at 11:27
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.
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.
Dec 04 2018 at 12:20
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.
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.
Dec 04 2018 at 12:29
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!
Dec 04 2018 at 13:11
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 :)
Dec 10 2018 at 13:21
togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Dec 10 2018 at 15:07
jamesgwyther posted:togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Brokers are different,
the very same trade on 2 different brokers could be positive on one broker and negative on the second.
togr posted:jamesgwyther posted:togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Brokers are different,
the very same trade on 2 different brokers could be positive on one broker and negative on the second.
How do you verify that a broker is honest, what comes to slippage? It is qjite straightforward to gauge spread but not so,with the slippage. I am talking about market makers, and don't know if other kinds of brokers can cheat as well. I had a luck to begin my trading with a spread of 0.2 pips, but I didn't quite realise how important spread Aand extra costsa are. Small sums are adding up.
Dec 13 2018 at 11:16
niceGLer posted:togr posted:jamesgwyther posted:togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Brokers are different,
the very same trade on 2 different brokers could be positive on one broker and negative on the second.
How do you verify that a broker is honest, what comes to slippage? It is qjite straightforward to gauge spread but not so,with the slippage. I am talking about market makers, and don't know if other kinds of brokers can cheat as well. I had a luck to begin my trading with a spread of 0.2 pips, but I didn't quite realise how important spread Aand extra costsa are. Small sums are adding up.
I suppose you can take positive slippage into consideration. Some brokers do not have positive slippage while others do.
Dec 14 2018 at 11:40
hmmm thanks for the replies guys.
Dec 14 2018 at 12:32
niceGLer posted:togr posted:jamesgwyther posted:togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Brokers are different,
the very same trade on 2 different brokers could be positive on one broker and negative on the second.
How do you verify that a broker is honest, what comes to slippage? It is qjite straightforward to gauge spread but not so,with the slippage. I am talking about market makers, and don't know if other kinds of brokers can cheat as well. I had a luck to begin my trading with a spread of 0.2 pips, but I didn't quite realise how important spread Aand extra costsa are. Small sums are adding up.
It needs testing on real accounts. But to answer it simply, the better the ratio of successful traders
the better the execution, spread and sllipage
Dec 23 2018 at 08:31
FxFTradingGroup posted:niceGLer posted:togr posted:jamesgwyther posted:togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Brokers are different,
the very same trade on 2 different brokers could be positive on one broker and negative on the second.
How do you verify that a broker is honest, what comes to slippage? It is qjite straightforward to gauge spread but not so,with the slippage. I am talking about market makers, and don't know if other kinds of brokers can cheat as well. I had a luck to begin my trading with a spread of 0.2 pips, but I didn't quite realise how important spread Aand extra costsa are. Small sums are adding up.
I suppose you can take positive slippage into consideration. Some brokers do not have positive slippage while others do.
Slippage is always risky, when we don’t whatever it will be, positive or negative.
Dec 24 2018 at 07:46
Adribaasmet posted:FxFTradingGroup posted:niceGLer posted:togr posted:jamesgwyther posted:togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Brokers are different,
the very same trade on 2 different brokers could be positive on one broker and negative on the second.
How do you verify that a broker is honest, what comes to slippage? It is qjite straightforward to gauge spread but not so,with the slippage. I am talking about market makers, and don't know if other kinds of brokers can cheat as well. I had a luck to begin my trading with a spread of 0.2 pips, but I didn't quite realise how important spread Aand extra costsa are. Small sums are adding up.
I suppose you can take positive slippage into consideration. Some brokers do not have positive slippage while others do.
Slippage is always risky, when we don’t whatever it will be, positive or negative.
You can't deny that slippage occurs in almost all live accounts. Some brokers keep the positive slippage for themselves while the traders pay negative slippage. Since he's asking about the verification of honesty amongst brokers, this is one which I can provide him with in his consideration.
Dec 24 2018 at 13:20
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.
FxFTradingGroup posted:Adribaasmet posted:FxFTradingGroup posted:niceGLer posted:togr posted:jamesgwyther posted:togr posted:
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?
Why would it be different with different brokers though?
Brokers are different,
the very same trade on 2 different brokers could be positive on one broker and negative on the second.
How do you verify that a broker is honest, what comes to slippage? It is qjite straightforward to gauge spread but not so,with the slippage. I am talking about market makers, and don't know if other kinds of brokers can cheat as well. I had a luck to begin my trading with a spread of 0.2 pips, but I didn't quite realise how important spread Aand extra costsa are. Small sums are adding up.
I suppose you can take positive slippage into consideration. Some brokers do not have positive slippage while others do.
Slippage is always risky, when we don’t whatever it will be, positive or negative.
You can't deny that slippage occurs in almost all live accounts. Some brokers keep the positive slippage for themselves while the traders pay negative slippage. Since he's asking about the verification of honesty amongst brokers, this is one which I can provide him with in his consideration.
Thanks. I haven't thought this way. The same is that the brokers have to state their percentage of losing players. The more winning traders the better. Together with spread slippage becomes an issue as the holding period length shortens. Usually ppl don't have patience for long term trades so it might be a good metrics.
