[Trader's Handbook] Draft articles, "out of pocket" discussions - page 10
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and trading strategy testing
Traders Guide: Orders, Prices, Deposits, Funds, Currencies
hrenfx, 2013.06.03 22:51
The fact is that in FOREX at this stage the MM-algorithms of the big owners - the banks - prevail. If you make money in FOREX - it is almost always a loss for these banks, or rather their algorithmic departments, which have millions of dollars to spend to keep you from making money in particular.Getting profit from another simple trader's drain is now at its core only indirectly possible: the trader will sell the MM-algorithm, and you will wrest this profit from him for yourself. Roughly speaking, to make money in FOREX is to plunder stolen money.
From this description, it appears that traders have only two choices - to play against the algorithms of MM brokers or against the algorithms of major banks via STP, ECN.
The logical choice is obvious in favour of MM since their algorithmic departments are less financed and probably weaker, and there are no extra intermediaries in the flow and there should be better access.
That said, most traders have a small deposit, as they say - "The average hamster carries around $200...", so the conclusion is "Go to kitchen DCs!"...?)
From this description, it appears that traders have only two choices - to play against algorithms of MM brokers or against the algorithms of big banks through STP, ECN.
The logical choice is obvious in favour of MM since their algorithmic departments are less financed and probably weaker, and there are no unnecessary intermediaries in the flow and there should be better access.
That said, most traders have a small deposit, as they say - "The average hamster carries around $200...", so the conclusion is "Go to kitchen DCs!"...?)
Right message, but wrong conclusion.
The DC of course spends less to improve its algorithms, but you are at its mercy. The brokerage company may not withdraw your money or rewrite all of your trading statistics at all.
In ECN you fight against your enemies as equals, neither you have power over them, nor they over you.
And if there is profit on the ECN account, you can be sure that this is your money, unlike the profit on the brokerage account (it will become yours only when you withdraw it to your bank account).
sergeev:
...Top 10 largest forex market makers according to Reuters :
- Deutsche Bank - 19.30%
- UBS - 14.85 %
- Citi - 9.00 %
- Royal Bank of Scotland - 8.90%
- Barclays Capital - 8.80 %
- Bank of America - 5.29 %
- HSBC - 4.36 %
- Goldman Sachs - 4.14 %
- JP Morgan - 3.33 %
- Morgan Stanley - 2.86 %
...Where is the link to the original source (but don't use wiki or other ones without link to the original source) ?
Here is an example by volume:
Top 50 Brokers of 2012: The good, bad and ugly of a post-MF global world
http://www.futuresmag.com/2012/12/01/top-50-brokers-of-2012-the-good-bad-and-ugly-of-a
http://media.futuresmag.com/futuresmag/article/2012/11/27/Top50Brokers_201263.pdf
And where is the link to the original source (just don't wiki or others without a link to the original source) ?
the headline indicates where the article is taken from.
taken in its entirety.
Here's an example by volume:
Top 50 Brokers of 2012: The good, bad and ugly of a post-MF global world
http://www.futuresmag.com/2012/12/01/top-50-brokers-of-2012-the-good-bad-and-ugly-of-a
http://media.futuresmag.com/futuresmag/article/2012/11/27/Top50Brokers_201263.pdf
so what? you don't have a link to the source either.
In the "counting who has the longest" case, there has to be some accounting paperwork in the form of a primary source.
I understand that this magazine has no reason to lie, so why should the other source lie?
Thank you so much for this thread and its quintessential Trader's Handbook! I wish you success!
The headline says where the article came from.
taken in its entirety.
So what? You don't have a link to the source, either.
in the "counting who has the longest" case, there should be some accounting paperwork in the form of a primary source.
I understand this magazine has no reason to lie, but why would another source lie?
It is not clear for what year the information may have been out of date long ago (or will be out of date later).
If there is a link to Reuters, it is possible to specify it, so that it is obvious.
I'm seeing the opposite effect of my writing - more mush in my head.
I have no idea how to twist myself to get an understanding. It looks like it will be of no use.
I see the opposite effect of my writing - more mush in my head.
I have no idea how to twist myself to get an understanding. It looks like it will be of no use.
If there's a link to Reuters, you can put it in there to make it visible.