Price signals, what will happen to them? - page 5
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
A cent account!Provider can afford higher risks
This is the first warning that catches your eye when you start looking at the signal info.
Once again the account was cent, but there was no warning!!! Now I know that not all cent accounts are displayed.
To all those who think that the ISP should take the same risks as the subscribers.....
I think it makes sense to separate the flies from the cutlets and elevate this principle to a policy.
1. There is actual trading at your own risk.
2. There are trading signals by subscribing to which the subscriber assumes the risks.
If you combine these two concepts, the signals will not live long, sooner or later the human factor will affect, because the provider is burdened with a double load - reputation and own finances.
As Mr. Fatkhullin once said that everyone must mind his own business. And it is far from certain that they must necessarily be interrelated.
To all those who think that the provider should take the same risks as the subscribers.
Actually -- copying signals -- is repeating someone else's trading in your own place.
If the risks here will be different. For example, it is easy to explain on the drawdown. Suppose the provider's risks are 2 times lower. When the Provider's drawdown is 50%, the Subscriber's account will be wiped out, while the Provider's one will live well.
Subscriber's risks, by definition, cannot be higher than ISP's.
Well, about that..:
... Trading is one thing, signal generation is another. And it is not the fact that they must be interrelated.
They are not interrelated at all, because the Signals Service broadcasts signals, while the trading is performed by the trader-provider.
Read "General Provisions" in Signals Service ruleshttps://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/rules- there are definitions for signals, signal provider, signal broadcasting and others.
Cents signals, what will happen to them?
Question for the administration, will they all be free?
Or is this a bug?
The New Year has passed, the holidays are over, I would like some comments!
Before you create a topic, use the forum search ... -Somebody experiencedhttps://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/223580
I agree with you 100%.
After all, if someone does not know how to choose, it does not mean that everyone should be deprived of the opportunity to choose.
I think that we should give more information on how to choose correctly and more criteria for assessing the signal.
90% do not know how to choose correctly. As a result, subscribers go to some 200% a day, losing a lot of money instead of choosing a good signal.
And throwing out cent accounts is a good screening of "growing accounts". Simple and effective.
Stop making money on subscribers instead of trading.
I would still find a compromise, make two boxes:
This would make everyone happy, and by the way, the signal service would make money from it. The subscriber would already know in which column to look for the signal, and the provider would be satisfied.
But to take away the possibility of passive income and at the same time upsetting the users would not have been an easy thing to do.
I would still find a compromise, make two columns: ...
I think it's all about the 'gain' indicator.
They don't calculate it correctly. They are treating the "gain" figure as a "rate of increase" -- it's like calculating the distance travelled through the speed of travel.
If you don't make withdrawals/additions, then the "gain" figure and the "growth rate" figure are equal. But it is impossible to trade without withdrawals and additions.
In the end, because of the substitution of indicators, you get cosmic figures of growth - that the MCs themselves are tired of laughing and bewildered, as well as constantly engaged in cleaning up accounts with super-high "growth".
Yes, and in general, can we remove the signals that don't cover the cost of the subscription? They have left accounts with 500 dollars or less and a subscription of 30 dollars, i.e. the subscriber should make at least 6% a month and 72% for a year, how many people are able to do this? Or, again, a subscriber must enter the market with 10 times deposit more than provider's one? Will there be a lot of such subscribers? Maybe, we just have to make the subscription price of 1 c.u. for cent accounts?
All moaning is useless.
It has long been known that the MC, if he has made up his mind, is like a poet:
And we should penalise by rating the accounts where the deposit is withdrawn before the position is closed. I fund accounts if required, but I don't withdraw them early on purpose, while many of them are fattening up their interest... The fraud is not related to cent accounts, but to the intentions of signal providers.