Simulate the situation. If 1,000 people were forced to trade amongst themselves, how would the graph behave? - 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
you don't know any exchanges without leverage?
So decide whether your model has leverage or not. And I don't know of any crypto-exchanges with leverage...
In any case, leverage is a pledge of an asset, and even to pledge you have to take it from somewhere.
How do you sell something that doesn't exist? You have to lend it out, but who will? Or you can create a supply commitment yourself and sell it.
don't turn the topic into an explanation by all participants to you of how a speculator can sell what he didn't buy.
So decide whether your model has leverage or not. And I don't know of any crypto-exchanges with leverage...
In any case, leverage is a pledge of an asset, and even a pledge has to be taken from somewhere.
someone will buy
Yes, someone will not stand it and will buy it. Then others will start buying. Next, you have to sell to complete the deal.
If everything stays in the cup in its place, then any selling on the market will only be at a disadvantage.
But if someone puts his bid to buy higher in the cup, it will be satisfied. If that someone
one of the first bidders below will fill the order, it will be in the plus position. The other people watching the action
see the movement down and possibly want to buy at a better price and put their buy requests
in the glass. They may be satisfied by those who bought lower. Again, those who were satisfied with the sales might buy back
at a market higher. This will create the appearance of a rising market. At that point, participants can start buying at the
market and buy up some of the cup higher. And those who were sitting at the bottom of the bet on bids can pull their bids higher.
Those who sold with limits will satisfy those who pulled up the bids and they will be in the plus.
We could describe this endlessly, speculating and fantasising.
No)) Leverage determines how much of a trade can be made. And the price/profit match is independent of the leverage.
It's amazing, it's been a long time since forex has existed, yet there are still people who swim with this leverage. Even without leverage, trades are possible, only the profits are small. Just exchange rubles for dollars or dollars for rubles, what kind of leverage is there - none, and there is no such a notion, but nevertheless the exchange is possible, and the result of such an exchange will be different as time goes by.
You forgot the first part - we have USD/RUB instrument, deposit in rubles, how do you want to short it without leverage?
You just have the notion as in forex - you made a bet on the jack - buy - will come first, sell - will not come first, you will make a profit or a loss on the outcome. But exchanges don't work like that - you need some kind of asset to make a transaction (you can borrow it or create a commitment yourself).
it's like the CFD model, contracts for difference.
I buy from someone, he sells to me.
Then the price goes up (due to the actions of other market participants) - my deposit goes up, my opponent's goes down.
then we perform opposite trades.
(not necessarily with each other, but with other market participants)
When I first entered the FOREX market I also failed to understand how I could sell something I didn't buy)
don't turn the topic into an explanation of how a speculator can sell what he didn't buy.
You have come to the DC to trade on drawn quotes, there are no real transactions in your case.
no leverage.
So you cannot sell immediately and everyone has to buy a virtual asset from the beginning.
Yes, someone will not stand it and will buy it. Then others will start buying. Next, you have to sell to complete the deal.
If everything stays in the cup in its place, then any selling on the market will only be at a disadvantage.
But if someone puts his bid to buy higher in the cup, it will be satisfied. If that someone
one of the first bidders below will fill the order, it will be in the plus position. The other people watching the action
see the movement down and possibly want to buy at a better price and put their buy requests
in the glass. They may be satisfied by those who bought lower. Again, those who were satisfied with the sales might buy back
at a market higher. This will create the appearance of a rising market. At that point, participants can start buying at
market and buy up some of the cup higher. And those who were sitting at the bottom of the bet on bids can pull their bids higher.
Those who sold with limits will satisfy those who pulled up the bids and they will be in the plus.
We could describe this endlessly, speculating and fantasising.
it's like the CFD model, contracts for difference.
I buy from someone, he sells to me.
Then the price goes up (due to actions of other market participants) - my deposit goes up, my opponent's deposit goes down.
then we perform opposite trades.
(not necessarily with each other, but with other market participants)
That's what I told you, there is the option of selling liabilities rather than the assets themselves, but without quoting the underlying instrument it makes no sense.
Otherwise your experiment will be about whether there are more buyers or sellers in the group.
That's what I told you, there is the option of selling liabilities rather than the assets themselves, but without quoting the underlying instrument it makes no sense.
Otherwise your experiment will be about whether there are more sellers or buyers in the group involved.