I don't understand, is this really possible? Or is it a tricky one? - page 4
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
Is this really still happening now? In ECN accounts too??? I do not understand the logic. For the broker on the contrary, the longer the client does not sink, the longer he will earn swaps and commissions. I do not believe that robots are being caught on ECN.
They do not catch anybody, all the cry of losers. They come in with a hundred quid, sell out and start crying about what a bad broker.
Does it really still happen now? On ECN accounts too??? I do not understand the logic. For the broker on the contrary, the longer the client does not withdraw, the longer they will earn swaps and commissions. Something I do not believe that the ECN do not sell robots.
Depending on the system, they have a great arsenal of tools there ranging from small delays in quotes to total hovering of the north. The bigger the deposit, the more you feel it.
For example, a scalper system that is profitable is easier to fix by creating artificial delays, while a more positional system can damage the trading results at least, at most it can cause a non-market quote, which big companies are afraid to do so as not to lose their reputation, but they can. There is an even simpler and more primitive scheme - a delay in withdrawal of funds due to various reasons. Like the bank transferred to the wrong place, the money was lost somewhere halfway, etc.. It's so stupid and funny to listen to their excuses sometimes :)
But the point is that scalpers are the most profitable systems, positional ones not so much. Therefore, large profits are made on scalping which is the easiest to fix. And positional systems are not so dangerous for them because they do not generate large profits per unit of deposit.
It happens all over the place on an industrial scale, regardless of the type of account.
ECN is just a screen, the brokerage market making schemes have not changed. Well, it is clear that the bigger and more high-status the kitchen, the safer the trading can be (but not always). And it's better to be fast.
P.s. personal experience of trading with large sums (and not just mine). And losers with 100 quid have never generated a profit, so they don't even know.
As an example, there was a popular product in the Market - Innovative Bot, may be you have seen it. Profit is relatively small, 20-30% per month, but stable. It worked for a while... Until people started trading them for large sums :)
ECN is just a screen, the brokerage market-making schemes have not changed. And it is clear that the bigger and more established the kitchen, the safer the trading can be. And the better is the bullion.
I've heard that they have programs for gambling machines/Internet casinos that adjust quotes, but I thought it was in the past because ECN quotes can be controlled if the broker discloses the suppliers-aggregators of quotes that they work with. Then it is possible to investigate if there was a loss on a closed position and find out if there really was such a quote. That is why I only consider ECN trading - I do not care if there are delays, quotes jumping - as long as the game is fair. If in the ECN minute bar of the aggregator history there is no such quotes it means the fraud and I have to leave this broker. And I cannot even start collaboration with those who do not disclose information about suppliers of ECN quotes and methods of check of quotes at the external/independent resources. I used to work with my broker, but it did not pass the openness test. As a result I am working with Australian and British broker on demo. They have deposits of $100 each and I'll open them when I get my business straightened out. And our broker with its classified "competitive advantages" may wait for the fools to deal with them.
All right, we'll see how it goes. As a last resort, I'll attach my $100 to the signal, see if something will work. But first I will try an Expert Advisor on ECN. My device has real spreads in the tester, so it's not a problem, but quotes jump, yeah, well, it's not even a problem of communication, but a real reflection of the market from the quote's aggregator without any exaggerations. Either that or you get even quotes from the broker's software)))
I have heard that they have software for slot machines/Internet casinos that adjusts quotes, but I thought that was in the past because ECN quotes can be controlled if the broker discloses information about suppliers - quote aggregators with which it works. Then it is possible to investigate if there was a loss on a closed position and find out if there really was such a quote. That is why I only consider ECN trading - I do not care if there are delays, quotes jumping - as long as the game is fair. If in the ECN minute bar of the aggregator history there is no such quotes it means the fraud and I have to leave this broker. And I cannot even start cooperating with those who do not disclose the information about suppliers of ECN quotes and methods of checking the quotes at the external/independent resources. I used to work with my broker, but it did not pass the openness test. As a result I am working with Australian and British broker on demo. They have deposits of $100 each and I'll open them when I get my business straightened out. But our broker with its classified "competitive advantages" may wait for the fools to do business with it.
They all have the same suppliers, Barclays, EBS, Nomura, LMAX some, what else. Doutche bank, Currenex, etc... but that doesn't mean they really output on them
In the end, if you trace the whole chain, it all comes down to a consortium of a few big banks
P.s. Personal experience of trading with large sums (and not just mine). And losers with 100 quid have never generated a profit, so they don't even know.
As an example - was a popular product in the market - Innovative bot, may be seen. Profit is relatively small, 20-30% per month, but stable. It worked for a while... Until people started trading them for large sums :)
There's a contradiction here.
In general, it's a rule of thumb - with a small amount the %% profit is off the charts. As the lot increases, the %% profit becomes significantly smaller.
As a result - to generate profit with 100$ is not particularly smart, but also profit, except for cigarettes. My neighbour, a retired businessman, trades Forex in such a way. So he says - enough for beer and cigarettes, and there is something to do).
There is a contradiction here.
In general, it's a rule of thumb - with a small amount, the %% profit is off the charts. As the lot increases, the %% profit becomes significantly smaller.
As a result - it does not take much intelligence to generate profit with 100$, but also profit, except for cigarettes. My neighbour, a retired businessman, trades Forex in such a way. So he says - enough for beer and cigarettes, and there is something to do).
Let's make a correction that trading for 100 quid is gambling and has nothing to do with real trading.
And here's more, from a recent pearl - one kitchen can only withdraw money after a month from the moment of deposit... And a large office, you can say the topchik... Ie apparently they have accumulated a status that over the month they leave all the money and have nothing to withdraw... and so earned for 2 days - decided to withdraw, but can not... sitting, thinking well, if so let more gambling engage and sink)
Let's make a correction that trading for 100 quid is gambling and has nothing to do with real trading
A loss-making position can then be investigated to see if that quote actually happened.
Don't make me laugh )
Brokers which have such restrictions on clients' withdrawal of their own funds have weak financial services, but this is a justified way out of the situation as there are broker's obligations and it is important for them to fix liquidity because they do not have reliable banks to back them up with additional funding. That is, unless the broker belongs to some financial industry group - whether in Russia or abroad.
Again, if the financial service is strong, it will always build a bridge with the financial institutions and here the financial institutions care about the status of the broker, the number of clients (legal and natural persons) and funds under management under the contractual base, which can act as collateral, and as you understand only with honest brokers it can look convincing. Therefore, limiting the clients' access to their funds is a forced measure only for new entrants. If a broker is more than 5 years old and practicing such practices - management just leaves a lot to be desired and that's the minimum... I just don't want to call anyone a crook))
Don't make me laugh )
I don't know, I am just communicating with the Central Bank about it - is the broker's refusal to disclose quotes suppliers legitimate as it deprives the client of the ability to control loss-making transactions and as a result can lead to abuse of the broker's position - the use of specialized software to distort quotes and provoke the artificial bankruptcy of the client and the appropriation of the broker's money. The Central Bank has accepted the request for consideration - awaiting a response. The topic is serious as it seems to me.
Maxim, if you don't have a quotation control mechanism, you can't trade. Research this topic with your broker. Personally, my two have told me how I can control their aggregators' quotes on internet resources independent of the broker. Fortunately aggregators are not the only ones that supply quotes to them.