I suggest everyone send complaints to NFA, besides posting. I have already done this. I sent to the contact email and two directors.
- Joined Apr 2008 | Status: Parsimony Rulez! | 3,216 Posts
OMG 
Talk about overreaction, anyone would think NFA was forcing you to trade forex! All they're trying to do is make it just that little bit more equitable for you, and heaven knows reading some of these posts it sounds like a few of you need as much help as you can get!
I know people don't like change but the new rules are nothing spectacular, I think some of you need to read up on a few things. For example how FIFO works. What it means in practical terms. Does it affect your bottom line P/L or risk. Does it affect stops and limts. And just for good measure find out what hedging actually is and how to hedge exposure effectively (clue: it has nothing to do with having long and short positions on the same pair!)
As smittens4212 said, work out the math for yourselves and you'll see. At least try and understand the business you're all attempting to profit from before you find fault with the people regulating it, in this instance in your best interests!
Talk about overreaction, anyone would think NFA was forcing you to trade forex! All they're trying to do is make it just that little bit more equitable for you, and heaven knows reading some of these posts it sounds like a few of you need as much help as you can get!
I know people don't like change but the new rules are nothing spectacular, I think some of you need to read up on a few things. For example how FIFO works. What it means in practical terms. Does it affect your bottom line P/L or risk. Does it affect stops and limts. And just for good measure find out what hedging actually is and how to hedge exposure effectively (clue: it has nothing to do with having long and short positions on the same pair!)
As smittens4212 said, work out the math for yourselves and you'll see. At least try and understand the business you're all attempting to profit from before you find fault with the people regulating it, in this instance in your best interests!
- | Joined Oct 2008 | Status: Member | 710 Posts
pipmutt, you know I'm totally in agreement with you, but I've posted in a couple of these NFA threads, and no matter how you try to explain and lay it out for them, they refuse to listen.
It's the same group of traders, and it's the same broken record every time-- the NFA is a broker organization out to get the little guys, the NFA wants to eliminate all leverage, the NFA wants to eliminate forex trading, etc.
I imagine that the cognitive dissonance it takes to believe any of the above, while the brokers are trying to work around these rules (because what, they want to offer hedging out of the goodness of their heart and not the thickness of their wallets?), is out of this world.
Better to just leave them be, pipmutt. I mean, read fxScavenger's post. Does that sound like someone you can convince with a rational and logical argument? Not to me. Sorry
It's the same group of traders, and it's the same broken record every time-- the NFA is a broker organization out to get the little guys, the NFA wants to eliminate all leverage, the NFA wants to eliminate forex trading, etc.
I imagine that the cognitive dissonance it takes to believe any of the above, while the brokers are trying to work around these rules (because what, they want to offer hedging out of the goodness of their heart and not the thickness of their wallets?), is out of this world.
Better to just leave them be, pipmutt. I mean, read fxScavenger's post. Does that sound like someone you can convince with a rational and logical argument? Not to me. Sorry
Buying and Selling the same instrument is NOT Hedging... It's Delusional.
Definition of Hedging
- Besides you will see these same pair oposite positions are called on forums also hedges from long time ago , and you know , maybe it's not so wrong because , seems to me, these same pair oposite position are doing their job like a 99 % hedge , and not considering the spread , they will be a like a 100 % hedge ..
- Here must be something I am missing , please somebody enlight me why is better to use another pair hedge, than a same pair opposite order hedge considering :
1- the hedge is greater = 99 % if you use a same pair opposite order ( I considered spread ) and not another pair , say USD/CHF for hedging EUR/USD ?
2- profit from spikes between the 2 pairs , when using a seconfd pair for hedging is too low.
3- profit from a possible swap is also waaay to low.
- So , you see, maybe these same pair hedges "are more hedged than those from your link....
- Maybe that is also the reason why brokers preffer to take opposite same pair of all traders positions and not hedges using another pair or options .......
- So it is obvious that they win more by using these same pair hedges than they would have done by using those real hedges.
- So they will be very happy only them to be able to do these not real hedges..
- Seems though these same pair hedges are recovered 70 % of times , considering market waves 70 %, so due to the no hedging rule I will lose not only a lousy , say 3 pips spread on GBP/USD ,which NFA wants to protect me against ( ridiculous ), but i will lose an entire 50 pips position..
- | Joined Oct 2008 | Status: Member | 710 Posts
If you take an opposite position on the same currency you are flat. You are not hedged. That is not what hedged means.
If you have a buy and a sell, you are flat. There is no other way to look at it, Redox. You don't HAVE a position. You can't take additional profit, you don't reduce your risk. Hedging is purely an accounting trick to capture additional spreads and rollover costs from unwitting traders. There is no other way to look at it. It's pure irony when you complain about the NFA protecting traders from themselves, because it's pretty obvious from your posts that they ARE helping traders such as yourself, when you clearly don't understand the underlying mechanics of what is going on.
Or, maybe they take the opposite side of a trade on most trader's positions because most traders are losers? 95% or so? They aren't 'hedging', they are betting you are going to be wrong.
If you have a buy and a sell, you are flat. There is no other way to look at it, Redox. You don't HAVE a position. You can't take additional profit, you don't reduce your risk. Hedging is purely an accounting trick to capture additional spreads and rollover costs from unwitting traders. There is no other way to look at it. It's pure irony when you complain about the NFA protecting traders from themselves, because it's pretty obvious from your posts that they ARE helping traders such as yourself, when you clearly don't understand the underlying mechanics of what is going on.
- Maybe that is also the reason why brokers preffer to take opposite same pair of all traders positions and not hedges using another pair or options .......
Or, maybe they take the opposite side of a trade on most trader's positions because most traders are losers? 95% or so? They aren't 'hedging', they are betting you are going to be wrong.
If you take an opposite position on the same currency you are flat. You are not hedged. That is not what hedged means.
If you have a buy and a sell, you are flat. There is no other way to look at it, Redox. You don't HAVE a position. You can't take additional profit, you don't reduce your risk. Hedging is purely an accounting trick to capture additional spreads and rollover costs from unwitting traders. There is no other way to look at it. It's pure irony when you complain about the NFA protecting traders from themselves, because it's pretty...
So 70 % I win BOTH sides and is 99 % hedging smittens, if no spread it would have been 100 % , and not flat, both opposite bets are WINNING 70 % , at least for me they were.
Oh, now , it will be a bit harder because NFA "ruled" this rule, not allowing hedging anymore.
I sent you took it a bit personal , is nothing personal man, we are contradicting al sometimes on this forum just to discover better strategies and see what it works better,so PLEASE give me an example HOW do you win MORE than 70 % by hedging on USD /CHF when you holding EUR/USD ??
because those pairs are corelated about 90-95 % so you win ONLY 5 % ....
, but,wait a minute , are you sure you win those 5 % , why then we all not use the EUR/USD +USD/CHF strategy I wonder ?????So you didn't convinced me at all.
If hedging is not working for you this might been because you didn't discovered how to used it
, there are lots of hedging strategies.Sure, hedging EUR/USD using USD/CHF is a very good nice strategy but can you prove it with ONE example it works better than my same pair hedge ?
In my hedge both my orders get filled 70 % , and when they don't get both filled, I lose ONLY the 3 pips spread ( not 2 spreads , how some are claiming, , first spread was already losed ).
Be cool
- | Joined Oct 2008 | Status: Member | 710 Posts
I don't hedge, hedging is not a necessary part of my trading, and true hedging probably isn't a necessary part of 99% of the traders' strategies on here either. What you call 'hedging' isn't hedging at all, all it is is an accounting trick that allows you to hold opposing positions and pay extra spreads and carry costs.
What you are doing does not provide any additional benefit! It's not a 'strategy', it is literally just paying additional costs to the brokers; why do you think they are so happy to try to work around it or move offshore?
I don't know what this means. 70% you win both sides? What does that mean. If you are holding two opposing positions, it doesn't matter where the market trends or doesn't trend, you are -not- making ANY money. You are flat. You're not hedging anything, it's not "99%" hedging (whatever that means), you don't have an open position that can make profit. For every dollar you make on your open long, you are losing a dollar on your open short.
I'm not taking anything personal, I don't have to-- I'm right. To be honest at this point, I'm not so much concerned about convincing traders like yourself what the issue is here, I'm concerned about the newer traders who are probably getting confused as hell by you guys who don't know what the hell you're talking about and can't be asked to prove anything you say, but instead keep on rattling on like a broken record saying the same wrong things over and over again like saying it enough will make it true.
What you are doing does not provide any additional benefit! It's not a 'strategy', it is literally just paying additional costs to the brokers; why do you think they are so happy to try to work around it or move offshore?
So 70 % I win BOTH sides and is 99 % hedging smittens, if no spread it would have been 100 % , and not flat, both opposite bets are WINNING 70 % , at least for me they were.
I don't know what this means. 70% you win both sides? What does that mean. If you are holding two opposing positions, it doesn't matter where the market trends or doesn't trend, you are -not- making ANY money. You are flat. You're not hedging anything, it's not "99%" hedging (whatever that means), you don't have an open position that can make profit. For every dollar you make on your open long, you are losing a dollar on your open short.
I'm not taking anything personal, I don't have to-- I'm right. To be honest at this point, I'm not so much concerned about convincing traders like yourself what the issue is here, I'm concerned about the newer traders who are probably getting confused as hell by you guys who don't know what the hell you're talking about and can't be asked to prove anything you say, but instead keep on rattling on like a broken record saying the same wrong things over and over again like saying it enough will make it true.
I don't hedge, hedging is not a necessary part of my trading, and true hedging probably isn't a necessary part of 99% of the traders' strategies on here either. What you call 'hedging' isn't hedging at all, all it is is an accounting trick that allows you to hold opposing positions and pay extra spreads and carry costs.
What you are doing does not provide any additional benefit! It's not a 'strategy', it is literally just paying additional costs to the brokers; why do you think they are so happy to try to work around it or move offshore?...
- It's obvious you don't know how to use hedging , you better go and study a couple of years
, because IF you use hedging in that manner course is a flat betting and you lose the spread ..
Oh and you better try to be cool , seems you are so tense..., adding the fact you are so smart , your head might just explode .
- Oh and if you keep , like you said to me , "rattling " , I'll just ignore you , and let YOU "rattling like a broken record " , to use your own words , I don't lose my time with broken records , I just buy a blue ray dvd using the money won from hedging .
- Dude,... keep your head cool, you are so smart it might explode
Smittens appears to have a grasp on basic mathematics so I reckon he'll probably be alright.
Now correct me here if I'm wrong but I was taught at school that:
1 - 1 = 0
You can dress it up however you like, but the change is only an accounting issue.
So I win 70 % of time by taking 2 opposite orders.
1 is a long order becomes 2 so i win 2-1 = 1 so it's a win
-1 is a short i wait till it gets becomes -2 so -1 -(-1)= -1+2=1 so i win again 1
so in total i win 1+1 =2
So did you have not been "taught" also "in school". to use your own words ,
, that 1 +1 =2 ????I quess not , you were present only when you were taught that 1-1 = 0
You misses when they teached you that 1 +1 = 2
But let it be like you both, for me 1 -1 makes 2 in forex , considering the math above.
I really don't care if for you 1 -1 makes ZERO in forex .
Sure , if you apply hedging like smittens see it in his post , you will get 1 -1 = 0 , I agree.
For many traders hedging helps , that is obvious , there a lot of posts about that , others didn't try or didn't worked for them but they are good at other strategies, maybe you too are very good in other strategies...
Many pips
Smittens appears to have a grasp on basic mathematics so I reckon he'll probably be alright.
Now correct me here if I'm wrong but I was taught at school that:
1 - 1 = 0
You can dress it up however you like, but the change is only an accounting issue.
So I win 70 % of time by taking 2 opposite orders.
## 1 is a long order and it becomes 2 so i win 2-1 = 1 so it's a win
## -1 is a short i wait till it gets becomes -2 so -1 -(-2) = -1+2=1 so i win again 1
------------------------------------------------------
So in total i win 1+1 = 2
Any 5 years old kid knows that .
This happens 70 % , sure I also lose the other 30 %, but it's enough to have the house edge so per total hedging it's a win.
But let it be like you both , it's obvious you know the result to 1-1 , birdt , that is 0 for you
.,as for me is 1 -1 makes 2 in forex , and i like it that way more , but , i'm obvious wrong ...hhahahahahahhaha...Be cool birdt
You know , I'm sure hedging strategies wouldn't existed if they were not profitable if done with brains.
I agree, if you aplly hedging like smittens see's it in his post , sure , 1 - 1 will be = 0 for you too
Many pips birdt