Edit Your Comment
ESMA and its implication
會員從Jul 23, 2018開始
102帖子
Oct 21, 2018 at 06:24
會員從Feb 22, 2011開始
4573帖子
s1m3nk0n posted:
The biggest implication is that traders are flowing out of EU-based brokerages into the brokerages that still offer 1:100-500 leverages. Not much will change besides that.
Well US traders are already forced to follow stupid US rules over the globe
EU will maybe force the same.
會員從Oct 26, 2018開始
10帖子
會員從Nov 02, 2018開始
10帖子
Nov 16, 2018 at 14:19
會員從Feb 22, 2011開始
4573帖子
BTW ESMA should be over
Contracts for Differences (from 1 August 2018) - a restriction on the marketing, distribution or sale of CFDs to retail investors. This restriction consists of: leverage limits on opening positions; a margin close out rule on a per account basis; a negative balance protection on a per account basis; preventing the use of incentives by a CFD provider; and a firm specific risk warning delivered in a standardised way
Next steps
MiFIR gives ESMA the power to introduce temporary intervention measures on a three monthly basis. Before the end of the three months, ESMA will review the product intervention measures and consider the need to extend them for a further three months.
At least I have not seen any decision to prolong it
Contracts for Differences (from 1 August 2018) - a restriction on the marketing, distribution or sale of CFDs to retail investors. This restriction consists of: leverage limits on opening positions; a margin close out rule on a per account basis; a negative balance protection on a per account basis; preventing the use of incentives by a CFD provider; and a firm specific risk warning delivered in a standardised way
Next steps
MiFIR gives ESMA the power to introduce temporary intervention measures on a three monthly basis. Before the end of the three months, ESMA will review the product intervention measures and consider the need to extend them for a further three months.
At least I have not seen any decision to prolong it
Nov 27, 2018 at 10:57
會員從Apr 18, 2017開始
659帖子
togr posted:
BTW ESMA should be over
Contracts for Differences (from 1 August 2018) - a restriction on the marketing, distribution or sale of CFDs to retail investors. This restriction consists of: leverage limits on opening positions; a margin close out rule on a per account basis; a negative balance protection on a per account basis; preventing the use of incentives by a CFD provider; and a firm specific risk warning delivered in a standardised way
Next steps
MiFIR gives ESMA the power to introduce temporary intervention measures on a three monthly basis. Before the end of the three months, ESMA will review the product intervention measures and consider the need to extend them for a further three months.
At least I have not seen any decision to prolong it
Thank you very much mate for your info. I really appreciate your effort! Have a good day, keep sharing your knowledge.
會員從Jan 25, 2010開始
1288帖子
Dec 16, 2018 at 10:00
會員從Jan 25, 2010開始
1288帖子
Greenwood posted:
I think 1:50 is enough leverage for most people. If you are good then you can still make money. If you then this will help you minimise losses
"Of course, the authorities believe that these regulations serve to limit the losses of bad traders (which they do, to an extent), but it is not the availability of leverage that wipes traders out – it’s the lack of education and discipline on the trader’s part.
In my view, the only real difference such regulations make is that instead of taking 3 months to wipe out a bad trader’s capital, it may now take 9 months. But the end result is still the same. Bad traders will keep losing until they improve. The availability of leverage has little to do with their losses.
Similar to the effect of diversification, reduced leverage protects losing traders while punishing the winning ones."
- Christopher Lee, The Retail Forex Manifesto
https://www.pipmavens.com/i/principlefive/
會員從Aug 27, 2017開始
875帖子
Dec 19, 2018 at 11:20
會員從Feb 22, 2011開始
4573帖子
I was always postulating the fact low leverage makes you lose money.
Nowadays got this confirmed. From whom? From ESMA itself:)
https://www.leaprate.com/forex/regulations/esma-admits-more-retail-cfd-traders-lost-money-after-leverage-cap/
Nowadays got this confirmed. From whom? From ESMA itself:)
https://www.leaprate.com/forex/regulations/esma-admits-more-retail-cfd-traders-lost-money-after-leverage-cap/
Dec 24, 2018 at 07:34
會員從Apr 18, 2017開始
659帖子
togr posted:
I was always postulating the fact low leverage makes you lose money.
Nowadays got this confirmed. From whom? From ESMA itself:)
https://www.leaprate.com/forex/regulations/esma-admits-more-retail-cfd-traders-lost-money-after-leverage-cap/
Interesting; let me check the link 1st! I’ll share my feedback very soon to you! Thanks mate.
May 30, 2019 at 14:31
會員從Dec 05, 2014開始
3帖子
Hallo :-)
Somebody told me that ESMA are planing to force non-european brokers like the Australian brokers to the same conditions as the brokers in EU under ESMA for citizins of the EU.
Do anybody know anything about this or if its true or not at all?
Cause if can find anything about it on the web or on ESMAs homepage.
Somebody told me that ESMA are planing to force non-european brokers like the Australian brokers to the same conditions as the brokers in EU under ESMA for citizins of the EU.
Do anybody know anything about this or if its true or not at all?
Cause if can find anything about it on the web or on ESMAs homepage.
會員從Aug 29, 2018開始
10帖子
會員從Aug 27, 2017開始
875帖子
Jul 30, 2019 at 09:41
會員從Jul 23, 2019開始
11帖子
togr posted:
I was always postulating the fact low leverage makes you lose money.
Nowadays got this confirmed. From whom? From ESMA itself:)
https://www.leaprate.com/forex/regulations/esma-admits-more-retail-cfd-traders-lost-money-after-leverage-cap/
It is nuts that the EU just ignore the data that they do not like. So this proves that lower leverage is a bad idea and what to the EU do, they just carry on regardless.
Jul 30, 2019 at 12:40
會員從Apr 18, 2017開始
700帖子
Aqissiaq posted:togr posted:
I was always postulating the fact low leverage makes you lose money.
Nowadays got this confirmed. From whom? From ESMA itself:)
https://www.leaprate.com/forex/regulations/esma-admits-more-retail-cfd-traders-lost-money-after-leverage-cap/
It is nuts that the EU just ignore the data that they do not like. So this proves that lower leverage is a bad idea and what to the EU do, they just carry on regardless.
Even; 1:30 is really too small! I think; retail traders need 1:100 trading leverage for trading!

*商業用途和垃圾郵件將不被容忍,並可能導致帳戶終止。
提示:發佈圖片/YouTube網址會自動嵌入到您的帖子中!
提示:鍵入@符號,自動完成參與此討論的用戶名。