Prop Firm Hub

As with trading strategies, the choice of which prop firm to go with (even whether it would actually be better to just trade your own account) depends on one's individual inclination. We pick what suits us, what makes us trade at our best.

Which was why a few posts back, I wondered aloud about how different prop traders perform over time given the many variables at work with their business-model of choice.

Which group would lead the pack in terms of earnings, longevity, career progression, etc? Is it the Hares (fast and furious, like FTMO), the Turtles (slow and steady, like 5ers), the OWLs (own high-leverage account)?

If we can pop back here to give an informal--but honest--report one year from now, we'll have some very interesting findings, I'm sure.

Be it GBPUSD or US30 Tickmill spread is much better than MFF platform. MFF spread is erratic, it can differ by 3 to 5 pips as compare to Tickmill at anytime of the day.

hey guy's n gal's
Here's something for the wanabee but failing to be funded traders.
money for jam !!!

In case you want to provide people with information then provide it in full, otherwise what the use of cut out picture ?

Her y'go. Check it out for your-selves.
https://www.fundedtradingplus.com/

wouldn't be too quick though
ok, why not add a little context before someone gets too excited:
"
[email protected] says:
June 8, 2021 at 2:01 pm
We provide a full range of training help, advice, courses and live trade room via traderoomplus.com. Visit https://members.traderoomplus.com for 14 days free membership to our live trade room.
As you can see from our site we have yet to launch fully, we expect to be able to launch in a couple of weeks, subject to our beta testing. We have a number of traders currently beta testing our systems and we’ll try publish some results soon.
"

also, Simon says:


the company registry chimes in:
https://www.dnb.com/business-directo...635d59c0b.html

quite likely a massive funding powerhouse!
OR
most likely another YouTuber like recently this Blake guy, who ready to jump on the pseudo-prop bandwagon?

would be so nice if some kind of structure would be in place to simply filter out the garbage from the actual few working companies.
here is the guy, CEO/founder, or whatever of his prop company, demonstrating trading on some other prop company's acct, live streaming yesterday (too)?

if this makes sense to you, go ahead, deserve your faith!
cheers
Z

ps:
forget to mention.
i see how someone would think 50% max dd allowed is great....indeed, finally a hope to some....but think for a moment how realistic that sound??? LOL

They seem legit. I'm logged into their daily webinar at the moment.

You doing a 100k challenge?

This model is quite interesting.

They force the trader to place trades in their portal.

$500k funded account for an outlay of $1200 sounds great until you realise that to succeed you need to finish with a strike rate >= 55% of 125 trades with a minimum RR of 2:1 a(critical :: per trade !!) minimum stop of 25 pips which means a target of at least 50 pips.

Retakes if minimum 40% win rate based on 2RR setups over the 125 trades.

Win rates of 45% and 50% come with a few extra bonuses.

I would suggest traders test their strategies in advance and see if they can actually hit a win rate of 55% across 125 trades with the minimum stop being 25 pips implying that a minimum target of 50 pips per trade is required.

Note that whilst stops can be moved to BE, if the trade fails to reach TP then the trader has to repeat this trade meaning the trade doesn't count even if it made a little profit.

Be cautious traders ... it will require high trading skill.

Masterrmind ........

Damn, then I am out!

This is worth reading
Funded Trading: 4 reasons most are designed to make you fail

Reason 1: Fake account sizes
You think you’re going to get a large account, for example $150,000. That’s what the provider wants you to think.
Sounds amazing, right?
Unfortunately, that’s not reality. You’re not getting that. You’re not even getting anything close to that. This is because of the drawdown limitations. These are a joke at your expense. It looks great on face value, but it falls apart when you look at the detail.
The ‘trailing drawdown’ is the catch here. This is the main thing that will make you fail.
Let us take the ‘professional’ $150,000 account as an example from one of our competitors. It has a trailing drawdown of $5,000. That means if you lose $5,000 and the account goes down to $145,000 the account is closed.
Take a few seconds to fully recognise what you just read.
Another way of putting it is, you are trading with a $5,000 account, not a $150,000 one. The account size may as well be stated as $100,000,000 for all the relevance it has.
Think about it, how can you call $5,000, $150,000?
If your bank account said you had $150,000, but you could only ever have $5,000 of it, would you accept that? Of course not. It’s just a number to make you feel good and trick you into thinking you’re trading with an account larger than you are. If this wasn’t bad enough, what makes this even harder is the drawdown trails.
Let’s say you make $1,000 profit, taking the balance to $151,000. The trailing drawdown moves up $1,000. That means you can only now drawdown to $146,000 before your account is closed! Your very limited drawdown allowance has been cut by a massive 20%!
Most funded trading providers offer trailing drawdown that is a small fraction of the theoretical account size. Look out for this when looking at them. We allow you to lose up to 50% of your account before we intervene. That’s somewhat larger than the typical 2-5% everyone else offers.
Reason 2: Unrealistic leverage or contract size for the account size
Sticking with the ‘professional’ account. 15 contracts may be the right size of trade for a $150,000 account but it’s far to big for a $5,000 account, and as shown in reason 1, your $150,000 account might really be a $5,000 account.
The fake account size encourages leveraging far too high, which means you’ll hit the trailing drawdown and pay the reset fee.
Reason 3: To do this full time you actually have to make a living trading and pay yourself
Point 3 and I need to revisit the hateful trailing drawdown.
If you want to make a living from trading you need to be able to withdraw profits on a regular basis. Let’s do some basic maths here.
Let’s use the fake $150,000 trading account, that, due to the drawdown limits, is actually a $5,000 account.
Let’s say you want to withdraw $10,000 a month to start with. That means you need to make $10,000 profit per month and also retain capital to allow you to trade in the first place.
That means you need to turn $5,000 into $15,000 in the first month.
That’s a 200% return!
You then withdraw it and do it all over again.
This will not happen.
You may think that you’ll build your capital at the same time e.g. turn $5,000 into $20,000 and withdraw $10,000, but again, this is the real world of trading.
That doesn’t happen.
Do you think institutional traders at banks and proprietary firms start off with small accounts and grow them into big accounts?
Of course they don’t.
They trade with big accounts and turn them into bigger accounts.

Reason 4: Restrictive rules that work against you
Generally speaking statistically, the shorter-term a trader trades, the higher the chance of failure. Successful day traders may open and close many of their trades during the same day but most of their profits are made from the few trades they leave open for a longer period.
Most funded trading providers make you close your trades overnight. What this forces everyone to be a day trader, regardless of your trading style or how each individual trade pans out. This statistically significantly reduces your chance of success.

Most traders would be out!

That's an RR of at least 2 meaning out of the 125 consecutive trades you need to get 55% of those entries with at least a 50 pip TP per trade!

A trader who can show this as proof is a genius.

Is it possible ? Yes but extremely rare and certainly luck will have far less to do with a successful outcome here.

Masterrmind ........

Yes Basill the trailing DD is the worst for the trader, it's simply nasty.

Traders should most definitely avoid Prop Firms with trailing DD.

Masterrmind .......

yeah

I think we got that point already Basill

https://www.forexfactory.com/thread/...5#post13574175

But what you are promoting is a different model which in my view looks a whole lot more difficult. I think I'll stick to the normal Prop firm model.

Thanks anyway

I'm not promoting anything. Everyone should keep an open mind & not just dismiss out of hand any information provided that does not conform with their closed mind thinking.

Her y'go. Check it out for your-selves.

hey guy's n gal's
Here's something for the wanabee but failing to be funded traders.
money for jam !!!

sounds like promoting to me!

No one is being closed minded mate we are taking the pros and cons and making up our minds accordingly.

Lol they make good points here but these newer firms need to stop blatantly trying to rubbish their competitions just to put themselves ahead.
Comes off more as a marketing pitch than anything else.

Also, i find it ridiculous that they would take shots at the Max DD criteria of other firms when they themselves provide considerably tougher conditions whoch may not cause you to fail like the Max DD, but is almost guaranteed to hinder many challengers from ever passing and getting "funded".

On the comparison table provided on their website they Say they have the simplest and most conducive rules compared to other firms. That's a blatant lie.

First of all, most scalpers, daytraders and basket traders are already disqualified or ineligible to participate (skill wise). Also, it's funny that these categories of traders usually tend to have the higher win rates (not necessarily profitability) due to the fact that they will usually cut bad trades quick and winning trades even quicker with a lot of breakevens, with Stop losses almost never reaching as much as 25pips per trade.

So let's say the program is tailored towards Swing or longer term traders.
Any one who has traded long enough would know that the longer you hold certain trades, the more likely it is to turn against you.
Swing traders are more likely to have low win rates but usually look for at least 1:2R.

in comparison=

Scalpers - Higher win rate/Lower RR
Swingers(lol) - Lower win rate/ Higher RR

So how many swing traders can comfortably achieve a 55% win rate over the course of 125 trades that each have to close out at 1:2R?

How long would that even take? All the 1R trades or B.E trades would be invalidated and rubbished. They wouldn't even be counted amongst the 125 trades attempted.

Oh, don't forget, you can only open one trade at a time.

a 10% or 8% target in 30 days with FTMO or Funding Talent VS a 55% win rate on 125 trades at 1:2R each with mandatory minimum 25pip stops?

I'll take the 10% max DD every damn day.

swing trading can do it. but if they ask for 125 trades as you say its gonna take at least half a year and trading numerous pairs.

in my eyes and criteria there are no more than 2 trades/week worth taking swing.

in fact if i look at EU 4hrs for the past 6 months there are only 12 trades worth takign a swing.
1 loss 11 wins.

so if they want that, it is just ridiculous.

Very ridiculous.

But it would seem that such a firm would actually risk real money in funding a successful trader with either a certified live account or at least copy trades from traders who pass their challenge.

The test appears quite difficult, but any trader that can hit 1:2R in the course of 125 trades (which could last over 3-6 months or more) with a 55% win rate will have proven that they are quite skilled and can do this consistently. A sensible company would happily fund such traders with real money knowing what they stand to gain in the long run.

Anyone who can do it and has the patience and discipline should indeed give it a shot.
Imagine having $500,000 at your disposal, with 50% max Drawdown? lmao sounds almost insane.