Official percentage of clients losing money (EU brokers) | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

List of Brokers taking U.S. Clients with hedging, scalping and no FIFO 314 replies

Overseas brokers who take U.S. clients? 3 replies

Another 11 brokers sued for accepting US clients 4 replies

Worried about losing money stored at the brokers account? 6 replies

Attachments: Official percentage of clients losing money (EU brokers)
Exit Attachments

Official percentage of clients losing money (EU brokers)

  • #1
  • First Post: Edited Aug 13, 2018 3:25am Aug 1, 2018 2:57am | Edited Aug 13, 2018 3:25am
Since there are a lot of threads dealing with the new ESMA restrictions an important aspect of the regulations is still missing in the discussions around.

EU brokers are forced to publish the percentage of retail client accounts losing money. I am presenting the official numbers summarized in this thread. Adding missing ones is much appreciated. I will try to keep the list updated, since brokers will update numbers over time as well.

Use these values with caution. They do NOT say anything about the amount a client is losing! Having ten 50 bucks accounts busted and one 10k account growing like hell still leads to horrible values here.

Nevertheless it is a big leap for transparency!

Activtrades = 80%
Admiral Markets UK = 85%
AxiTrader = 75%
Darwinex = 69%
Exness = 80%
Forex.com = 80%
FXCM = 79,79%
FXOpen UK = 78%
FxPro = 79% (former 85%)
FXTM = 89%
GKFX = 82%
Hotforex = 71.05%
IG Markets = 79%
JFD = 74%
Oanda = 77%
Pepperstone = 79%
Tickmill EU = 73,32%
Tickmill UK = 79,27%
XM = 69.45%


(August 2018)

How are the values calculated?

The risk warning shall include an up-to-date provider-specific loss percentage based on a calculation of the percentage of CFD trading accounts provided to retail clients by the CFD provider that lost money. The calculation shall be performed every three months and cover the 12-month period preceding the date on which it is performed (‘12-month calculation period’).

For the purposes of the calculation:

a. an individual retail client CFD trading account shall be considered to have lost money if the sum of all realised and unrealised net profits on CFDs connected to the CFD trading account during the 12-month calculation period is negative;

b. any costs relating to the CFDs connected to the CFD trading account shall be included in the calculation, including all charges, fees and commissions;

c. the following items shall be excluded from the calculation:
i. any CFD trading account that did not have an open CFD connected to it within the calculation period;
ii. any profits or losses from products other than CFDs connected to the CFD trading account;
iii. any deposits or withdrawals of funds from the CFD trading account;
  • #2
  • Edited 4:32pm Aug 1, 2018 3:02am | Edited 4:32pm
Attached Image


13 hours later this banner appeared. It says 79% lose money. I guess they recalculated at the end of the month and published new data.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot028.png Size: 169 KB
  • #3
  • Aug 1, 2018 4:03am Aug 1, 2018 4:03am
Quoting Drolph
Since there are a lot of threads dealing with the new ESMA restrictions an important aspect of the regulations is still missing in the discussions around. EU brokers are forced to publish the percentage of retail client accounts losing money. I am presenting the official numbers summarized in this thread. Adding missing ones is much appreciated. I will try to keep the list updated, since brokers will update numbers over time as well. Use these values with caution. They do NOT say anything about the amount a client is losing! Having ten 50 bucks...
Do you have a source of this data?
Thanks for publishing
  • #4
  • Aug 1, 2018 4:23am Aug 1, 2018 4:23am
Numbers are given in the risk warnings of each broker.
  • #5
  • Aug 1, 2018 5:02am Aug 1, 2018 5:02am
Ig market : 79%
  • #6
  • Aug 1, 2018 8:49am Aug 1, 2018 8:49am
Attached Image
Toxic Flow for FX Brokers.
  • #7
  • Aug 1, 2018 9:20am Aug 1, 2018 9:20am
Quoting anti-flash
{image}
wow, that's more realistic!
  • #8
  • Aug 1, 2018 9:22am Aug 1, 2018 9:22am
These numbers are surpisingly good. I thought they will be somewhere above 90-95%. Definitely a big slap to those who always comment trading is impossible. Or some shit like the second comment above this one. Must be a painful realisation, that it is not the case, and you are at fault.
Price and volume reveals everything. The market moves on supply and demand.
  • #9
  • Aug 1, 2018 9:37am Aug 1, 2018 9:37am
Over 5-10 year period its probably more like 99.5%...
  • #10
  • Aug 1, 2018 9:59am Aug 1, 2018 9:59am
Quoting Redbaron81
Over 5-10 year period its probably more like 99.5%...
If you exclude undercapitalized gamblers losing their 100$ accounts in 30 days the values would be lower on the other hand...

There is truly enough room for speculation and sadly not enough transparency to get a deeper view.
  • #11
  • Edited Aug 2, 2018 8:47am Aug 1, 2018 10:15am | Edited Aug 2, 2018 8:47am
What matters is to be part of the successful percentage
Toxic Flow for FX Brokers.
  • #12
  • Aug 1, 2018 10:34am Aug 1, 2018 10:34am
My Broker is XM and on the list above they do quite well although maybe they have been lucky and have managed to lure more clients that can actually trade and make profit rather than those that don't. They also had bonus points which you got with every trade and could cash them in for value or add them to your account as a larger amount and use that to trade with which was a good way to top up without adding any extra money.
I have to add that until the last few months I was on the loose list. However with lots or perseverance I have been doing way better and loosing trades have become a thing of the past. My account was not in a good state and I had been gradually crawling my way back towards break even. Yeah I know that is not great but I thought I would keep going with this account for some fun see if I could actually take it back to positive and try to get my trading better.
I have been following Strat PASR for some time and I must give his thread a great deal of credit for the improvement in my understanding of trading Forex.

I had a notice from XM to say that any bonus points still not claimed would be lost after the new rules kicked in so to cash them in before that date. Now that was good news. The bad news was that any bonus points added to your live trading account up till now would be lost also. Now in my mind, anything that happened before the new rules should have been left alone not taken away. A bit unfair I think. So back to this morning when I logged in to the account I wasn't sure what to expect but to my amazement it was still going. Hmm, I thought lucky me, bonus is still there maybe I read the letter wrong. However later in the morning, I guess when XM head office started, BAM my account was cleared. No warning, no explanation just gone. They took the bonus credit points first which made the account have a margin call I guess. Will I carry on trading is the big question now. Maybe back to demo till I'm sure that I'm on the right track. I wonder how many other accounts XM and other brokers cleared out today?
  • #13
  • Aug 1, 2018 10:47am Aug 1, 2018 10:47am
Quoting Drolph
...Nevertheless it is a big leap for transparency!...
I hope that brokers will now set things in motion to get those figures down (=better). Would be good if they now start competing on the number of succesful retail traders. I'll bet they can do a lot to help the retail traders getting better results.
  • #14
  • Aug 1, 2018 11:01am Aug 1, 2018 11:01am
Quoting jansb000
{quote} I hope that brokers will now set things in motion to get those figures down (=better). Would be good if they now start competing on the number of succesful retail traders. I'll bet they can do a lot to help the retail traders getting better results.
their models arent changed, a bucketshop broker, or a B book broker, or even a hybrid A&B book broker is just the same.
they arent making their income from successful traders, but from gamblers who place frequent bets.
that is what they need, that is what they were luring in the past, and that is what they will be after for the time being.

it is a big fat mistake to think that your average broker want to do anything for successful retail trading/traders.

not to mention, most had low to extremely low barrier of entry, ie. chance to trade on tiny equity.
i am sorry, but anything sub 5-10k equity isnt a trader, per se, and never was.
the 30$ no-deposit bonus of XM, and similar offers were, as always to lure gamblers ( and even from that the low end!!), glorified to be called traders.
the extreme end been the likes of 1$ option trading, and such.

one can only hope to live long enough that maybe, just maybe, there will be a centralized forex somewhere down the road...
there is always, always another trade!!
  • #15
  • Aug 2, 2018 12:01pm Aug 2, 2018 12:01pm
Quoting profitfarmer
{quote} their models arent changed, a bucketshop broker, or a B book broker, or even a hybrid A&B book broker is just the same.
One fallout of the new ESMA rules, namely the negative balance protection, is, that now brokers that pass orders to their liquidity providers take on the risk (of negative balances). Therefore, we shall see a 'flight' back to mainly b-books and thus a conflict of interest. Because then (in the case of negative balance) a broker has no loss in the b-book, but only a no-win situation (that is, beyond a client's balance).
Return To Disorder
  • #16
  • Aug 2, 2018 12:56pm Aug 2, 2018 12:56pm
Quoting rockit
{quote} One fallout of the new ESMA rules, namely the negative balance protection, is, that now brokers that pass orders to their liquidity providers take on the risk (of negative balances). Therefore, we shall see a 'flight' back to mainly b-books and thus a conflict of interest. Because then (in the case of negative balance) a broker has no loss in the b-book, but only a no-win situation (that is, beyond a client's balance).
Half truth.
Anyone who opt to have higher leverage (and most brokers on the list came up with the 'professional client' solution) is in turn giving up the negative balance protection ( as in professional clients supposedly know what they do).
And most traders, professional or not will take the high leverage route if an option presented ( and it has).
Good old b-book/hybrid book is well and alive, especially since all Aussie brokers also do, and ESMA big part herd traders to them, too.
There was never and won't have those 0.01 lots "going to the market".
And small traders gamblers with ESMA placing smaller than ever bets, or the restricted leverage.
Anyway, belief vs belief.
I really wish you were right, by fear you are not, only too optimistic or idealist.
there is always, always another trade!!
  • #17
  • Aug 2, 2018 1:53pm Aug 2, 2018 1:53pm
Quoting profitfarmer
{quote} Half truth.
Let me rephrase: As a consequence of ESMA's NBP rule, we will mainly have b-book brokers in the future and therefore brokers with conflict of interest, because only by this (b-book) brokers can hold themselves harmless in case the balance on a client's account goes negative.
Return To Disorder
  • #18
  • Aug 2, 2018 3:26pm Aug 2, 2018 3:26pm
Good stuff, thanks for sharing :-)
  • #19
  • Aug 9, 2018 5:48am Aug 9, 2018 5:48am
Quoting Drolph
Since there are a lot of threads dealing with the new ESMA restrictions an important aspect of the regulations is still missing in the discussions around. EU brokers are forced to publish the percentage of retail client accounts losing money. I am presenting the official numbers summarized in this thread. Adding missing ones is much appreciated. I will try to keep the list updated, since brokers will update numbers over time as well. Use these values with caution. They do NOT say anything about the amount a client is losing! Having ten 50 bucks...

What transparency?How many lose in the following years?How many lose at several brokers?

The numbers are much higher .All the forums have many many countless 95 % lose threads.
  • #20
  • Aug 9, 2018 6:31am Aug 9, 2018 6:31am
Quoting loozers
{quote} All the forums have many many countless 95 % lose threads.
And they are based on what? Speculations! Fact ist, the majority is losing. But accurate numbers are subject of guessing mostly.

If I am telling you that I am making more money on a regular basis than 95 newbies are losing by wasting their 250 bucks accounts... your numbers are still correct, but they are of no value anymore.

Simply read carefully. These are official numbers. Conclusions based on them are limited indeed as mentioned in my initial post based on the point of view. They are a step into the right direction though.
0 traders viewing now