FTMO - For serious traders

Wow your first post on this thread was since July 2019.
Have you been trying to pass the challenge since then or just recently took the leap of faith?

Congrats by the way.

lol well the fact that he was worried they might run out of money and he wouldnt be able to capitalise on it maybe got him motivated to pass faster so he can get a bit of the pie before it runs out

Lol that's what I thought, but he's/she's posting the feedback 2 years later, I'm wondering when he started trying

Dear thread members,

I am writing here to provide clarity on what has happened regarding my previous posts. Both for ftmo and for myself.



Acc no: 1090034370 verification £140000 acc



On the 20th April I reached out to support regarding a trade which was executed well below ($26) the current market price. I also emailed Otakar on the 18th but whether or not that email address is still in use or not I don’t know.

Here is my initial email:


Please see email to support dated 20/04/21 where I show that the price given to me for eth/usd was at least $26 and at worst $31 lower than the true price across all exchanges at that time.

For my trade it was a difference of at least £949.

Price executed 2286, price given 2259.
That is a 1% difference of the asset price.

I showed 1 min charts of nearly every exchange available showing the highs and lows at the time all of which showed between 2281 and 2291 also high volume at the specific time.

Email below:

Hi Ftmo,


Please can this be looked into please.

Acc number: 1090034370

Trade is eth/usd buy 50 lots. Time of close 03:24:24 (01:24:24 Uk time)

Attachment g
Please also see identical trade also closed 18 seconds prior.

Attachment g

Both trades were closed manually by market execution.

When I executed the close of the 03:24:24 trade I closed @ price 2293 approx with a loss of roughly £700.

Before opening these 2 trades (which was @ 02:59 and 03:02 respectively. (00:59and 01:02 Uk time), I checked my max permitted loss for the day and also took a screenshot incase something like this happened as there have been a lot of issues with metrix in the near past.

Please see screenshot below with time at top. As you can see 4 mins before trades were opened.

Attachment g

Permitted loss for day £1822.95.

After closing out last trade I went into my history and saw the last trade at the bottom was -£1970 and thought maybe it was a different trade but it wasn’t.

The price given to me (2259.71) was $30-40 lower than the traded price across all exchanges at that time.

Please see screenshot below showing all prices:

Attachment gAttachment g
Above is coindesk @ 01:24 and 01:25 Uk time

Attachment gAttachment g
Above is Uk trading view with all the exchanges down the left side showing prices @ 01:24 and 01:25 (it says 00:24and 00:25 but the time showing is gmt not gmt+1.

Below is a screenshot to show Uk.tradingview chart is showing gmt not gmt+1 Uk time. As you can see at the top, screenshot is taken at 02:26 and end of chart is showing 01:26.


Please also see screenshot taken @ 01:26, 2 mins after close showing 24 hour low (2286.59) which was the current trading price at that time.
Attachment g
And please also see 1 min chart screenshot on investing.com (which ftmo platform is always in sync with on eth/usd showing high low and close of the 01:25candle.

Attachment g
And also bitstamp showing 01:24 1 min candle high low and close with high volume at the time.

Attachment gPlease also see price of 2259 is not hit until 6mins after I close my trade.

Attachment g
Finally a screenshot of the 1m chart in my mt5 platform showing the candle.

Attachment g

I understand you want to imitate slippage as best to market conditions on your demos as possible but this here was not a case of slippage and this massive gap in price would not have happened if trading on a real account.
This gap/slip was near equivalent of ether’s daily range on a normal day.

This situation has caused a fail in my £140000 verification which I believe to be unjust.


Best Regards

Joe



On 21/04/21 I received an email from support complaints and investigations department as follows:

Dear Joseph,
Thank you for reaching out to us.
Upon investigating your account 1090034370 and the specific trade #4990502, it seems that your trade was closed with slippage.
Market slippage usually occurs when the market does not have sufficient liquidity to fill your order execution at the desired price level and as we can see in the chart, which I have also attached below this email, there was a volatile price action that took place at that moment.
For more information regarding this issue please access the following link https://www.babypips.com/forexpedia/slippage
To provide some clarification, all our demo trading accounts have a live market execution model. This may include slippages, both negative and positive, depending on the available counter-order in the real markets. If you run the same strategy on our FTMO Account or any live account for that instance, the results should be identical. This is how execution in live markets work, and there is no workaround. We cannot guarantee instant order execution and fills, simply because that is not how the live markets work. The live execution model will not influence your profitability in any way if your trading system or strategy is robust enough, usable, and compatible with the real trading environment. Remember that we need to be able to generate the same profits on our live corporate accounts, the same as you make on your FTMO Account. This is the fact that traders have to embrace, just as thousands of other traders who trade with the same conditions in real markets.
Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do to help you in this situation as that is how the market normally behaves. We hope for your understanding.
Should you have any further questions or hesitations please feel free to contact us again.
Best regards,
Complaints & Investigations

I responded explaining slippage should not come into play anymore on mt5 as you are offering a “fill or kill” policy as default. Please see email below.


Hi (name removed),

Thanks for getting back to me.
I understand ftmo want to be as close to a live market as much as possible so this should be in every aspect.

In ftmo server on mt5 there are 2 options made available for traders to execute trades.

1. Fill or kill
2. Immediate or cancel

These options are available for all execution types. I.e market execution, buy limit/stop, sell limit/stop etc..

By default it is fill or kill that is always selected on the ftmo server for mt5 and even if it wasn’t I would always choose this option simply to avoid situations like this.
Also this feature was one of the main reasons I migrated from mt4 over to mt5 in the first place.

I’m sure I do not need to explain the definition of “fill or kill” but if so I attach a couple of links and screenshots below of what this means to have implemented.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fok.asp

Attachment g
In layman’s terms and what this boils down to if the trade was not able to be honoured at the desired price the order should have been cancelled and not filled at a worse price.

Up until Sunday morning I have had zero issues with slippage since implementing mt5 (500+ trades) with the understanding this was due to fill or kill.



Regards

Joseph
Sent from my iPhone

Please also see here in particular the exact wording “fill or kill has no price slippage”.

Attachment g

https://www.fibogroup.eu/clients/glo...ill-order-fok/


Please ftmo, let’s keep things real and right here.

Regards

Joseph

Dear FTMO,

Am I being ignored now?

I’ve been very loyal to ftmo. Over the last 4.5 months I’ve given you my time and €4000 euros.

Multiple times I’ve had to pause challenges where your metrix has shown violations that never happened.

You probably think I should be grateful that these ‘failures’ ended up not being failures but I’m not. In reality these multiple situations have been hinderances.
Hinderances on time, psychology and patience.

I have been very patient and understanding with you over the prior months and again stayed LOYAL.

Back in December or January I was failed due to the 7 hour Saturday break in crypto hours. Back then you never notified anyone of these closures but a week or two later you started to notify people of this. I let it go. I was happy you started to notify people but for me personally it was too little too late. Again I accepted and moved on.

Another fail which I still don’t believe should have been a fail as equity was in £500 profit on the day and floating losses were hedged going into the next day (still equity was +£500). At midnight it was an instant fail. I always thought you went on equity not balance. Again, I left it and moved on.

This time you use slippage against me where slippage should not be an issue when you offer fill or kill.

What are you doing?

If this is something that has been overlooked when building your system then this is your fault not mine and you should take responsibility for it the same way you expect traders to take responsibility for their flaws also. It can’t be a one way street all the time.

There is a lot of negative press surrounding “prop firms” at the moment due to a statement made by one of your competitors as you know.
I never wanted to believe this about you guys but it’s starting to become very difficult not to.

Trading challenges have enough stresses as it is, questioning the integrity of who you are dealing with just multiplies this.

I am aware of slippages (very unrealistic ones also -$14 on US100) with you in the past, it caused me to fail a challenge so I know too well. But when I’ve seen on mt5 you offering fill or kill within myself I praised you.

This is one of two scenarios.

1. This is a flaw you are unaware of.

2. You are aware of it but don’t care.

Either way now that it’s apparent slippages are still happening, offering fok leads traders into a false sense of security (especially ones who have already been burned) that slippage will not occur anymore and they will trade accordingly with that knowledge.
THIS IS NOT OUR FAULT!

If this was a trial in court the judge would rule in my favour and it would be justified.

If you guys are honest so will you.

Bringing this email to a close.

I am sorry about the rant but in all honesty I’m tired.
I’m tired of having to keep pointing out your metrics is showing fails when they’re not.
I’m tired of having to fight for what’s right and having to be penalised for things that are wrong on your part.

This is not right or fair and it’s exhausting.

You make enough money off of traders failing legitimately you don’t need to go any further than that.

I emailed Otakar directly first about this matter and still have not had a response, I do not expect one now either. But seriously, I’m a customer and probably a good one at that.
€4k in 4.5 months? I think I deserve better in all honesty.

A timely response will be appreciated.

Regards

Joseph

I received a response after this see below:

Dear Joseph,
I hope this email finds you well.
Sorry for the late reply. We would like to let you know that we appreciate your continued loyalty to FTMO and we value your time with us.
However, please know that we take our clients seriously and we acknowledge that we have received your email. We are currently looking into this matter and we will soon update you via this email thread. All the information you have sent us is being taken into account and this is checked thoroughly. The investigation is still ongoing and rest assured that your concern is not left unattended. Therefore, we kindly ask for your patience and understanding.
Best regards,

Support Team

After sending this I sent another follow up email as I was receiving no response, see below:


Hi FTMO,

Thank you (name removed) for replying to me last week also.

Today will be 9 days since I initially reached out to you guys.

I don’t want to rush you and I understand you need to do your investigations but I honestly can’t see what you need to investigate at my end.

If things need to be investigated within your system I understand but I don’t see why I am being left waiting regarding my account.

I think everything I have brought to your attention is pretty straightforward to work out.

As I have said in my previous email I have been very patient and loyal with you guys.

I would just like to move on from this so I can carry on with my journey please.

Regards

Joseph


I then receive this response below.

Dear Joseph,
Thank you for your patience.
Upon double-checking your concerned trade #4990502, I would like to apologize for the information provided previously. From the investigation, we have found out that the trade was not executed with slippage but was executed at market price. For your reference, I have attached the log from our servers below.
https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...6-4ebc9ab574c7

In case you tried to execute the trade earlier, kindly provide us with the trading logs from your journal from the 18th of April 2021.
Thank you for your cooperation and we hope to resolve this issue promptly.
Best regards,

I respond with;

Hi (name removed),

The price you are showing is compatible with the true market price. 2285 is acceptable (even though I saw 2293 for the time of the trade. The price given to me was 2259.
Regards

Joseph

I then send in my trading log.

I then receive an email stating:

Dear Joseph,
Thank you for your reply.
I have checked with the Trading Department, and I am sorry for all the confusion caused.
Kindly allow me to explain the Fill Policy: Fill or Kill on the FTMO MT5 platform, as there might have been a misunderstanding with regards to this feature. The Fill or Kill (FOK) policy set as default in MT5 means that an order can be filled only in the specified volume. This policy is basically unrelated to the execution model, but rather to the market liquidity. In other words, this policy refers to instances when there is not enough liquidity in the market in order to fill your order. It does not necessarily protect you from slippage as it depends mainly on the execution model.
At FTMO, we have a live execution model, which means that orders get executed based on current market data. In case there is insufficient liquidity at a moment, the platform gathers enough counter-orders to fill your order immediately and this may create slippage. If there is not enough liquidity in a standardized timeframe of executing the order, the order will be cancelled.
The FOK policy that you had referred to was quite different from the FOK implemented by retail brokers, and the one you mentioned mainly occurs in advanced trading such as institutional trading, or interbank transactions.
Additionally, as you have noticed, there is also a disclaimer in the execution window that states: "Attention! The trade will be executed at market conditions, difference with requested price may be significant!"
We hope for your understanding that, unfortunately, we are not able to provide instant execution as this is not how markets naturally operate.
Should you have any further questions or hesitations please feel free to contact us again.
Best regards,

I responded with a short email stating that this is debatable (I didn’t have the energy to get into what was not right here) but irrelevant now towards my case as you have already told me that slippage did not happen and showed me the log of my trade with the true price.

Hi Aiden,

Thank you for your email.

Yesterday you told me quote:

“Upon double-checking your concerned trade #4990502, I would like to apologize for the information provided previously. From the investigation, we have found out that the trade was not executed with slippage but was executed at market price. For your reference, I have attached the log from our servers below.

https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...6-4ebc9ab574c7

You sent me the log yesterday of trade no:4990502 showing it in your servers being closed @ 2285.98 also stating that the trade was not executed with slippage.

Based on your calculations 2314.25 to 2285.98 is - $28.27
28.27 * 50 lots= 1413.5 usd



1413.5 usd to gbp @ 1.384 approx Friday 16th close = 1021.31 gbp = 949.07 difference to what the affected trade is.

Attachment g
Max daily loss shows over by 812.45

Attachment g
Minus 949.07 from 7812.45 = 6863.38

Which does not constitute a violation.

What you have sent me regarding fok is debatable but clearly irrelevant to my case based on your last email as you have shown me the log of my trade and it does not correlate at my end.

This is getting really exhausting now.

Joseph

My email response as follows:

Hi (name removed),

So I need to go back to our previous argument regarding fok and your companies version which I’m sorry but your trading department’s version is wrong.

The definition is clear and slippage cannot occur when fok is in place. If PRICE cannot be met in its entirety (volume) then the trade is cancelled. Retail or institution it’s the same.

If the trade cannot be filled at the volume AND PRICE entered into the order book then the order is cancelled.

No one is re writing these rules/guidelines here on my side it simply is what it is.

How can only volume be a factor?

If one would take your version of fok then fok becomes completely the opposite of what it’s definition is, with no boundaries and defeats the object in it's entirety.

Who cares about volume in a specified time if the price is off by miles? This is laughable

I don’t know where your trading department is getting their information from but it’s missing a key and obvious part which is PRICE.

Price is exactly what trading is about...

I’m attaching 3 more references below.
I can send you a lot more but I don’t want to get into a back and forth with you again.

https://stocksharp.com/articles/1116...and-IOC-(FAK)/

Literally, its name stands for - 'Fill Or Kill'. The essence of this order is that it isexecuted immediately and in full at the stated price, or will not be executed at all, which eliminates the possibility of slippage. Thus, if your ordercannot be executed in full, then the order is simply rejected, if the order can be executed in full, then the order is executed in full at the specified price. This type of order is very convenient for scalping or arbitrage strategies, as they eliminate the risk of slippage.
Below is an example of the rejection of the FOK order in the CME system, due to the fact that the order size is 20, and the book contains only 19, so the order can not be executed completely, and the system cancels it.

Another link:
https://forextraininggroup.com/disse...x-order-types/

Some traders like to use a particular type of limit order called a Fill or Kill or FOK order that can take two forms. The first type of FOK order instructs a broker to either fill the order completely at the specific price right away or cancel the order. The second type of FOK order instructs a broker to fill whatever they can of the order immediately at the stated price and then cancel the rest. This latter Fill or Kill limit order type is most often used when trading large amounts of currency.

Another link:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/capit...ypes-explained


6. Fill-Or-Kill (FOK) order
This is similar to an immediate-or-cancel market order but with one major difference – a fill-or-kill order must be made immediately and in full. If not, it’s cancelled.
Imagine you want to buy XYZ stock at 225p a share. In this case though you are buying a lotof shares – say 10,000. You want to make sure you buy at this price. A fill-or-kill ensures you can do that. If not possible, for whatever reason, the fill-or-kill trade is cancelled.

The references and links I can provide are endless.

This cannot be any clearer and it is what it is and what everyone understands/knows it to be.

There are no “other versions” as stated in your email. It is not defined by execution type. “Live execution model” has nothing to do with it and if anything only supports it. This is so ridiculous it’s unreal.

This is the understanding of it and what traders understand when using it.

If “your version” is different better not to have it at all because as I have said in my previous email, all you are doing is leading traders into a false sense of security.

Honestly it’s not a good look at all.

Regards

Joseph
Sent from my iPhone

I am replied to with;

Dear Joseph,
Thank you for your reply.
I would like to clarify any confusion regarding order execution on our platform as it is in our best interest to be transparent. I would like to point out your assumption that FOK orders guarantee a fill at a specified price and that slippages with FOK orders are impossible. Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect and I believe that there are many sources on the internet that also provide false information. FOK is a type of order that is a 'Time-in-Force' Order that is characterized by entirely filling the volume of your order, otherwise, killing the order if no liquidity is found within a specified duration. This ensures that you do not receive a partial fill if you do not wish to enter the market partially. However, FOK does not imply that negative slippage is impossible. In your case, you have sent a Market Order with a Fill-Or-Kill condition. In other words, you have requested to fill the order at the best possible Market Price. Of course, you as a trader may choose the extent of the slippage received for your order. If the slippage is too big, you can choose to reject the order but this setting must be set up in the platform with the deviation parameter.
For your reference, I am attaching official documentation directly from Metaquotes defining the Fill Policy.
https://www.metatrader5.com/en/mobil...pt/fill_policy
In case you have any further questions feel free to contact us again.
Best regards,
Complaints & Investigations

I reply with;

Hi (name removed),

Sorry for the late reply as I have only just sat down to read my emails.

Thank you for the link provided.

I will quote from the link here and highlight a specific point with a question to you.

1. Fill or Kill
2. This execution policy means that an order can be executed only in the specified volume. If the necessary amount of a financial instrument is currently unavailable in the market, the order will not be executed. The required volume can be filled by several offers available on the market at the moment.
3. Please can you for the sake of this conversation specify what I have highlighted above (an order) is please.

Regards

Joseph

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com › ...Web resultsFill or Kill (FOK) - Overview, How It Works, Example

https://www.warriortrading.com/fill-...g-terminology/


https://help.bybit.com/hc/en-us/arti...F-GTC-IOC-FOK-


https://money.stackexchange.com/ques...r-limit-orders

Within this link above there is a link to guidelines set by the SEC.

The SEC reference document (PDF) explains order types in more detail.
A fill-or-kill order asks to be filled at a particular price (like a limit order), but if that price or a better one is not currently available then the order is immediately canceled. It does not accept a worse price (the way a market order does), nor does it sit around waiting (the way a limit order does). Since the exchange computes whether to "fill" or "kill" the order as soon as it is arrives, there's also no way to cancel it (like a market order).

After that email I waited for a response and after 7 days I came here to reach out to Tomas.

Today I received a response as follows;

Dear Joseph,
Based on your FF post, I have reviewed your case and can confirm that my colleague processed your case correctly.
Firstly, you brought the FIll or Kill topic. A simple google search gives you a definition right away and the execution refers to the fill of the entire volume, not actually exact price, therefore slippage can occur as it had.
Secondly, regarding the slippage, unfortunately, you exited the position at the same time when significant order cleared a large portion of the bid order book and therefore your position received a slippage. I have reviewed our server logs as well and can see that the position was filled in just under 250 ms from the time our server received the order to exit the position, which is completely within the market standard as well.
I'm attaching screenshots of the FoK definition as well as the relevant price action from TradingView and our system, which depicts the trade both on a regular candle chart, as well as the chart of both, ask and bid prices. You can observe a large price gap at the time. Also attached is an excerpt from our server logs which shows that the order was executed in due time, in 249 ms.
I can see that you were quite unlucky with the exit of the trade, however as everything was processed correctly by our, unfortunately, we can't really change the trading results. I know that this can be frustrating for you, but the market can be unforgiving and if trading long enough, situations like this one will eventually happen to most traders. Cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile at times as you probably know and such spikes in crypto markets are not uncommon.
I'm not sure if you are trading them on finance for example, but on many pairs, extreme flash crashes, much larger than the price action relevant to your trade can be observed.
Lastly, since you have made this case public on FF and we can't share the information publicly without your explicit consent, I would like your explicit approval for us to make the information regarding the relevant trade - 4990502 - public on ForexFactory so we can explain this case to everyone and calm down the other community members. Thank you.
Have a nice day,
Best regards,

I responded with;

Hi (name removed),

Thank you for your email detailed email.

I have been in contact with the SEC firstly on the 28/4/21 to which I was responded to on the 6/5/21.

Who are the Sec?
“ The Securities and Exchange Commission is a federal agency that regulates securities markets in the United States. The SEC is responsible for enforcing securities laws, regulating the securities markets and related entities and working to ensure investors are treated fairly.”

I then sent a follow up email back as which I was responded to today.

Please see below regarding what fok is directly from sec who the rules were
made by.

You can see the full thread from the bottom with my initial questions based from what ftmo was stating.

Regarding permission, if consent is mutual and I have your permission also then I have no problem on that basis.

Regards

Joseph

Please see sec emails;

Dear (name removed):

Thank you for your follow-up to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Please be advised, as stated in the Nasdaq glossary, a fill-or-kill order may be treated differently by some exchanges. Generally, a fill-or-kill order is specific to a price and quantity of shares, however, some exchanges may execute a fill-or-kill order in whole or in part, known as partial fills. On other exchanges, there are no partial fills for a fill-or-kill order. If the shares are not available for the specific price and quantity then the order is cancelled.

If you have questions regarding how a specific order is to be filled, we recommend you contact your brokerage firm directly for more information on how its market orders are executed.

Mr. Rinell Randolph
Attorney
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Office of Investor Education and Advocacy
100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549

--------------- Original Message ---------------
From: Joe J
Sent: 5/6/2021 12:03 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SEC Response HO::~01137062~::HO

Dear Mr Randolph,

Thank you for your reply. I have seen this reference on the sec website.

My question is specific to price. Would it be true to say if the order is not filled in its entirety at the specific volume and price then the order should be cancelled?

Or if the volume was only available at a much worse price then the order would be filled anyway at a worse price?

Please it is very important that this is clarified for me.

Best Regards

Joseph

Sent from my iPhone

On 4 May 2021, at 23:04, [email protected] wrote:

?Dear Mr. Name removed :

Thank you for contacting the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Generally, a fill-or-kill order is an order to buy or sell a stock that must be executed immediately in its entirety; otherwise, the entire order will be cancelled (https://www.investor.gov/introductio...-or-kill-order). There is no distinction between a retail investor fill-or-kill order and an institution submitting the same type of order. However, some exchanges may treat fill-or-kill orders differently. You may wish to review the Nasdaq glossary at https://www.nasdaq.com/glossary/f/fill-or-kill-order.

For more information on how a firm fills your order, please review the information located here: https://www.investor.gov/introductio...r-bulletins-14.

Sincerely,

Rinell Randolph
Attorney
Office of Investor Education and Advocacy
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission


File Attachment:
Correspondent Name: Mr. Joseph (name removed)
Create Date: 2021-04-28 16:30:17
Origin: Web
File #: HO::~01137062~::HO
Description:
Hi Please can you define fill or kill for me at a retail level? Is there is a difference between fill or kill for retail investors vs institutions or is it universal? If fill or kill is in place can a fok order be filled at a different (less desirable) price than specified? Is fok price specific as well as volume specific or only volume specific? Thank you and Regards Joseph

ref:_00D30JxQy._500t0l5P5MAAU:ref

I also send another email to ftmo;
Hi (name removed)

Also funnily enough the website where you directed me to for the fok statement is the sec website.

Regards

Joseph

Hi again Joseph,
Please note that the SEC representative was referring to the trading of shares, not CFDs or FOREX and also states that different brokerages may have different conventions and also, despite your specific request a price at which the position is filled is not mentioned by the SEC representative. In the screenshot I sent to you, I highlighted the broad definition provided as the first relevant answer by google, taken from Wikipedia. You can see that Wikipedia states that generally "immediately" means "a few seconds, customarily" and does not specify that the price would have to be exactly the same. The average execution time is decreasing as the internet connectivity improves over time and in our case, we consider execution within 0.5 seconds as normal. As I already mentioned in my previous email, trade 4990502 was executed within 250 milliseconds, which is a great execution speed.
To provide further clarity, Fill or Kill execution on our platform refers to the execution where positions can not receive partial fills (in case of insufficient liquidity) and can either be filled in their entirety or declined by the server. Generally, this is not posing any issues but can occasionally result in pending order not being triggered if the price reaches exactly the set price level but not enough volume is present in the available counter order at that level. Please note that market orders on STP accounts these days are rarely ever executed at the same price which is available at the moment of "pressing the buy/sell button" as highly liquid pairs have often 10+ price ticks within a second and as there is some processing time necessary for your order to reach our server and our platform to request and verify available counter order, the price is usually a little different by the time the order is confirmed. In 99% of the cases, the resulting difference is minuscule, but in the case of your order 4990502, there was a significant difference for the reasons described in my previous email.
Regarding the privacy keeping, you have actually already published the matter and therefore there we will be glad if the whole matter can be communicated to other FF members so that they can clear their possible doubts. You can share the specifics related to trade 4990502, but pleased do not disclose the full names of our support agents that have contributed to this case.
Please let me know if you have any further questions and have a nice day,
Best regards,

This is my last response;

Dear (Name removed),

Sorry to keep emailing you but I’d like to clarify a few things.

I understand you are very busy and I don’t want to keep taking up your time but I do truly believe a lot is being overlooked here.

I quote from your email;

Please note that the SEC representative was referring to the trading of shares, not CFDs or FOREX and also states that different brokerages may have different conventions and also, despite your specific request a price at which the position is filled is not mentioned by the SEC representative.

He is not actually a representative that has emailed me back it is the Sec’s official lawyer Mr Rinnie Randolph.
You can google him if you like.



Secondly I quote from his email;

Please be advised, as stated in the Nasdaq glossary, a fill-or-kill order may be treated differently by some exchanges.
Generally, a fill-or-kill order is specific to a price and quantity of shares, however, some exchanges may execute a fill-or-kill order in whole or in part, known as partial fills. On other exchanges, there are no partial fills for a fill-or-kill order. If the shares are not available for the specific price and quantity then the order is cancelled.


To me this clearly states price and this has been my argument all along.

The second part he refers to regarding other exchanges being different also states price as a key parameter.

Quote;

If the shares are not available for the specific price and quantity then the order is cancelled

Yes you are right he mentions shares but does not say “this only refers to shares” also there is no reference anywhere in literature that states these rules only apply to shares and not forex and cfd’s.

My argument has always been that if the order could not have been filled at the desired price it should have not been filled at all.

Also you are mistaken as the link you provided me was from investor.gov (secs website) and not Wikipedia.
I attach the screenshot you sent be here:

If you google “definition of a fok order” 9 out of 10 say price is relavent and if price is not met in in the specified volume then the order is cancelled.

Investor.gov is one of the very few that doesn’t state price but as you see from the lawyers response he has stated the same as the rest.

You quote;

To provide further clarity, Fill or Kill execution on our platform refers to the execution where positions can not receive partial fills (in case of insufficient liquidity) and can either be filled in their entirety or declined by the server.

Again price is relevant.


Please do not think I am trying to be a pain or be awkward or trying to cause problems within your company.
I truly believe I am in the right and that’s why I am writing to you.
I’m sure if you believed you were in the right you would do the same. I’m not a stubborn person who doesn’t take no for an answer. No matter how far something goes I will always accept when I am wrong.
However here I do not believe I am wrong.

Regarding ff I know things can look one sided. I am not out to bash ftmo at all.

I just wanted a fair resolution to my matter and I didn’t feel I was getting anywhere.

As I said I believe I am in the right and I can’t help that.

Regards

Joseph

Here as of now nothing is up in the air.
This is as transparent as transparent gets.

If I am in the wrong I will accept.

I would appreciate if anyone is to comment they base their comments with knowledge of this argument and proper research.

all I wanted was a fair outcome based on information that is freely available.

I have had (to what I believe) is clarification from the top, being an official SEC lawyer stating if price and volume is not met then the order should have been cancelled.

this has been my argument from the start.

As I have stated I truly do not believe I am wrong here.

Joseph

Hi again,

Sorry, just not for it to look like I’m hiding anything I’ve noticed an email missing from my post which I will attach here now.

in between quote;

This is getting really exhausting now.

Joseph

My email response as follows:

(email from ftmo missing below)

Hi (name removed),

So I need to go back to our previous argument regarding fok and your companies version which I’m sorry but your trading department’s version is wrong.


Dear Joseph,
Thank you for your reply.
I apologize again for the message stating that your account was not executed with slippage when in fact there was slippage. The information provided from the logs of our server was actually when you submitted the trade for execution, however, due to insufficient liquidity, the trade was closed at the next available quote.
With regards to the violation on your account, I am informing you that your account has unfortunately exceeded the Max. Daily Loss. Please see the analysis below:
The system reported that your Max. Daily Loss exceeded on 2021-04-18 at 02:24:25 CE(S)T. During that time, the sum of closed positions was-7,815.83 GBP. Except for the sum of closed positions you also had several open positions and they amounted to the floating loss of 0.00 GBP. By adding the sum of closed positions, open position and commissions, we can conclude that you have reached the Max. Daily Loss of-7,815.83 GBP. Please see the complete violation analysis document attached below this email.
In conclusion, you have sadly violated the Max Daily Loss and the account is no longer eligible to continue. Unfortunately, for this reason, this account cannot qualify any longer to further continue in the Evaluation process. Sadly, there is no retest either as your account doesn’t fall under the conditions for a free repeat.
Please be reminded again that the loss limits are calculated as a sum of your closed and open positions, i.e. your equity (not balance) and to help you better understand the importance of the Maximum daily loss, please see this article: https://ftmo.com/en/why-do-we-care-about-open-losses/
You can learn more about Maximum Daily Loss here: https://www.ftmo.com/en/welcome/#maximum-daily-loss
It is also advisable to take some time off to analyze your trading and take a break. You will soon receive your comprehensive account analysis.
Please let me know if you need further clarification.
Best regards,
Aidan Lam
Complaints & Investigations

Also ftmo please accept my apologies for the name at the bottom. I didn’t remove it and was an honest mistake.

I doubt you are going to get a positive response to this. FOK is a forex pipe dream. Very few liquidity providers will accept it as it doesn't allow them to last look effectively and various other reasons. Only tiny crappy LP's would allow it. Also, crypto doesn't have FOK because its a matching market not a regulated centralized one with obligations. Crypto with that much leverage is even more wild west..... def not going to get proper FOK's. Metaquotes made the cute little FOK button to appease the flavor of the day some years ago but i doubt it works effectively if at all.

Thank you Takis I appreciate your input.

Do you know if fok is optional for brokers to add into mt5 or it’s always a default?

I’ve only used mt5 with ftmo and mt4 with other brokers.

if it is an optional add on then better not have it at all to not cause situations like this IMO.

Also as it seems you have knowledge. Whether or not LP’s respect what it stands for.

Is in your opinion the version ftmo is saying correct to what is set out and what fok is meant to be?

Also you mentioned leverage. Account size £140000
eth price 2300 * 50 = 115000 usd.

based on account size there is no leverage. Based on mdl or max permitted loss yes there is high leverage.

50 x of eth is not considered a large trade size in terms of volume in the market

FOK doesn't really exist in forex. Some companies tried to do it but a whole bunch of negative complaints occurred when almost every news order was cancelled. A few have FOK IF slippage = greater than X pips but even they get negative reviews for it. so most just gave up on it because the customer base in forex is fickle and lacking knowledge

I dont believe such a function exists for crypto. It would be strange if it did considering how transactions work.

from what i read from your sources you posted about fill or kill, it only guarantess full fill at market price if liquidity is available, doesnt say that its going to be with no slippage, the liquidity might not be at the price you want but it is for it to fully fill your market order at another price and will execute there, i guess there must be an option to no fill orders that have a too big deviation, anyway you risked too much and you were playing with fire anyway, and besides crypto is the most inneficent instrument to trade on ftmo, i dont think ftmo was in the wrong here, i dont know what happened with the ETH market during ur time of execution, if it was very volatile and you went all in and got slipped out, then you took a huge risk and you payed for market not filling u at the price u wanted

i never had any issue with market slippage on ftmo at all

Interesting read. No friggin' idea what "Fill or Kill" was/is before now. We learn everyday.

Over leveraged on highly illiquid instrument is like using a handless sword.
Having done dozen of challenges with FTMO, never had problem with slippage. It's my wrong doings in the end.

Hi Tomas
Thank you for response. I do find it odd that you have received very few complaints when so many technical trading approaches rely on having such data, perhaps that is just directly correlated to the amount of people who have requested the platform as I suspect MT4/5 to be more popular. That aside it is unfortunate that you do not think it is a priority and you really have to question why you offer the platform without this data ? What is the point of any trading platform ? Besides it's functionality in transacting trades it is a medium to present historical data for every instrument offered in a graphical format. It gives us a pictorial image of all OHLC, that is the market, that is everything we know about it, it's bizarre FTMO don't consider that information as important enough to be provided urgently. Yes I am fully aware of the workaround to use other charting but that is besides the point, I prefer to chart and trade on the same platform. Therefore the platform should not have been offered with the obvious lack of data as it is clearly not fit for purpose and think FTMO should concede on that point. I could pick any instrument besides EU & GU and you can immediately see the issue, I really fail to see how you don't consider it important enough to rectify immediately, rather than several weeks, it really is like a SAT NAV without data, pretty useless.




Kind Regards

FXD

Do not want to play devil's advocate, but there is a description in one of the FTMO's responses about FOK on MT5 platform. It's simply volume preferred policy, regardless of slippage or price of fill.

1. Fill or Kill
   This execution policy means that an order can be executed only in the specified volume. If the necessary amount of a financial instrument is currently unavailable in the market, the order will not be executed. The required volume can be filled by several offers available on the market at the moment.

Source
1 https://www.metatrader5.com/en/mobil...pt/fill_policy

yes and even then it doesn't work because metaquotes doesn't have a trading bridge to Liquidity themselves. Its just a pretty button.
I believe FXOpen and another had a fill or kill setting where if slippage = 10 or 12 pips or something away from market it would kill the order (trader would be saved) but when that was implemented some years ago the traders who were gambling NFP kept crying because "MY TRADEW OULD HAVE MADE 3000 PIPS IF YOU DIDNT KILL IT"... cant win either way tbh.

Lol Hey Don, I think you've pretty much answered most of your questions yourself.
It is simply not up there on the list of pressing priorities.
Probably only a handful of FTMO Traders or challengers choose to use Ctrader and the one's that do may not be choosing it for analysis of very old historical data.
Mt4/mt5 absorb a huge chunk of the market share.. It's not even comparable.
If they've received very few/little to no complains or requests for more data on Ctrader, I would think it's only logical to exert more effort on things that a multitude of people actually worry about, like Metatrader feed issues, Metrix issues, payment issues, etc. and deal with the least pressing issues much later, especially when you consider that your issue actually has a workaround.

Also, the main purpose of a trading platform is actually trade execution and Ctrader does a good job with that, showing risk parameters, profit targets, SL etc

Nothing bizarre about it to me.
Matter of fact, I find it bizarre that you find it bizarre that they choose to deal with more pressing issues before something you seem to be the only one I've seen in months complaining about.

Wait wait...
Matter of fact , I find it bizarre that you don't find it bizarre that no one on both prop firm threads seem to share this concern you've raised, but yet find it bizarre that FTMO thinks it can wait.

Hello Traders,
I hope everyone’s doing well and without further ado, let’s get into today’s short update.

Since the last week, we were occupied mostly with our daily bread operations and therefore there’s not any new feature or hot news that I could announce this time. Our mobile app is still within the finalizing phase and as the app is going to be used by thousands of traders, we really need to make sure to spot and fix any bugs and errors before the official launch.

Regarding the trading platforms, we went through scheduled maintenance which took place on all platforms between Saturday 8th, 8:00 AM, and Sunday 9th, 3:00 AM. The same sort of maintenance break is scheduled also for the upcoming weekend, again starting on Saturday at 8:00 AM and finalizing on Sunday, 3:00 AM.
We understand the inconvenience that these downtimes represent for Crypto weekend traders, however, occasional maintenance breaks are necessary to ensure a solid, stable trading platform. I’ve been also discussing those breaks with our Trading department and we should likely see fewer breaks in the future.
Also, Buddha's Birthday will be celebrated on the 19th of May, due to which Hang Seng China 50 Index (HK50.cash) will close early at 10:00 PM on Tuesday 18th of May. The stock index will be closed all day on Wednesday 19th of May, reopening at 04:15 AM on Thursday, 20th of May.

That’s it for the regular updates and now, let’s move on to your posts. There were not as many topics discussed as there usually are, but some of them caused quite a stir. Please find my responses below:


Hi Endgame99, you are correct that it is technically possible to pass the Challenge by closing one hugely profitable trade and subsequently using microlots to pass the Minimum of 10 Trading Days, but as relying on a single trade resembles rather gambling than a proper trading strategy, it is not something that we would want to advertise. We also aspire to give our traders as much trading freedom as we rationally can, hence we do not want to force them to trade a certain minimal volume in order for the day to be recognized as a trading day.
Please keep in mind that it is in our best interest to provide FTMO Accounts to serious traders who can consistently generate profits both for us and themselves. As mentioned in my previous posts, completely removing the minimum of 10 trading days would attract more people who’d try to pass the Evaluation as fast as possible with a single, high volume trade, often without prior preparation. Although we are aware that the intended aim of the 10 Minimum Trading Days can be bypassed by the strategy above, we certainly do not want to encourage such an approach and therefore will not remove the requirement. We are looking for consistent and seasoned traders who should not have an issue proving their profitability in at least 10 trading days.

Firstly, I would like to ask that anyone who wishes to share so many details as Joseph did does so in a way that doesn’t clutter the forum – in this case, as we have provided approval to disclose this case, Joseph published most of the original email communication going back and forth. I would strongly prefer that if needs to be, the communication be put together aside from our forum and link to it provided on the forum with a brief description so that only the traders interested in the case could review it. I have to point out that as per our Terms & Conditions, the communication should remain private unless explicit approval is agreed by both parties (as in this case).
Now to provide more clarity on the topic, our communication continued after the last email published by Joseph and it essentially boiled down to whether Fill or Kill execution guarantees the price available at the time of making the request or not. Joseph insisted that it does and I explained that in general, it doesn’t. I guess the confusion was created as the price was mentioned in some of the definitions. Please observe that general definitions cover all possible types of orders including pending and limit orders.
Definition Example: A Fill or Kill order is an order that is directed to be executed immediately at the market or specified price or canceled if not filled - https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fok.asp). As Joseph's trade was exited by market sell (manually closing a buy position), the position was correctly filled at the price available at the time of confirmation of processing the order). He closed the order at the time of extreme volatility on ethereum and the position received a fill in 249 ms with about 26 USD price difference from the price present during the time he pressed the close order button. As the price backtracked later, Joseph felt like this was not fair, but please consider the situation where the price would continue sharply dropping. In such case, any trader would be grateful for being able to exit the trade at whatever best price available at the time rather than being stuck in it and such is a purpose of the market orders. The takeaway here is that market buy/sell (manually closing a position is processed by market sell/buy too) execution processes the request at the price currently available at the market during the confirmation of the transaction, not during the time when the button is pressed. As there is some processing time necessary for the request to travel from traders platform to our server, our server to confirm avaialble counter order with LP and the processing of the transaction, there can be a difference between the price present at the time of pressing the sell/buy/close order button and the actual fill of it. Usually, this difference is minuscule, but in times of extreme volatility, the difference can be significant.

Hello Phenotype, glad to hear all is going well on your end and good luck with the rest of your Free Trial. As I’ve said in my response to Delta-vega, new & more efficient MetriX technology should be hopefully incorporated later this year.

Hi Jarnorey, thanks for the feedback and happy trading!

Hello FX-DON, as much as I understand that the presence of historical data directly in the trading platform would make your trading easier, we simply can not currently prioritize uploading historical data to cTrader (used roughly by 3% of our traders) among our other projects, especially when an alternative solution in a form of available charting platforms is already out there. We naturally want to provide the best possible trading conditions on all our platforms, so adding more extensive historical data to cTrader in the queue as well.


And that should be all for today, I hope I've managed to clarify certain claims and thank you everybody for the attention and I'll see you next week.

-Tomas