Prop Firm Hub | Page 787 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Featured US Prop Firms

Similar Threads

Anyone trading with a Prop firm 33 replies

So I accepted a Prop Trading job in South Beach Miami 44 replies

prop firm new model - my trading journey 871 replies

Attachments: Prop Firm Hub
Exit Attachments

Prop Firm Hub

  • #15,721
  • May 17, 2023 2:38am May 17, 2023 2:38am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-Exactly right. If given the choice, I would prefer to have limited leverage instead of limited lots. I think that limiting lots is too restrictive, personally, because it forces you to trade inside of a box. At least with limited leverage, you may still be able to add onto your position if you are running in profit. With lot limits, you may not be able to do that.
I agree. I mentioned lot limitation because it's another way of limiting risk but obviously much more imperfect.
1 lot GBPUSD is roughly double size than 1 lot AUDUSD.
  • #15,722
  • Edited 5:46am May 17, 2023 4:51am | Edited 5:46am
Quoting Capablanca
Stolen from prop group. FTMO warning a guy that he is using too much leverage {image} {image} Obviously he is dealing with an absurd leverage. But it's some sort of stupid to provide an enormous amount of leverage and them claiming that he is using too much of what is allowed by themselves.
organised hostile operations and seek legal reparations? is this a joke? if he used that sort of leverage to pass the challenges and had failed i bet he wouldn t be receiving that sort of email. plus, per contract agreement if that is a funded account u are not liable for any losses that may occur. i guess instead of organised hostile attack they could also write act of God or anything under the sun. Ftmo starting to have issues lately with payouts, cheeky emails and so on. i guess they had to pay a few large payouts and now they re afraid. for me they were in 1st place but now that i keep seeing this sort of BS lately, i think MFF might be taking the lead. 10% in 30 days or less to pass a challenge but then u wanna enforce responsible trading. if they aren t doing nothing shady like arb or taking advantage of the feed in some way, u can t really comment on the leverage being used in my opinion. that s the game. if they bet and lose u keep the fee, if they bet an win u pay out 80%.......
  • #15,723
  • May 17, 2023 6:38am May 17, 2023 6:38am
Quoting failinforex
{quote} did you max up the MFF accounts?
clear first obstacle. The respond was like instant for phase 2. Now see whether I can get back my fee plus $460.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: tY9YrnJ.png Size: 50 KB
  • #15,724
  • May 17, 2023 9:17am May 17, 2023 9:17am
Quoting 1odi
for me they were in 1st place but now that i keep seeing this sort of BS lately, i think MFF might be taking the lead.
-Yeah... I think MFF has had the lead for a while now. Maybe time for FTMO to employ an instant funding model.

Quoting 1odi
u can t really comment on the leverage being used in my opinion. that s the game. if they bet and lose u keep the fee, if they bet an win u pay out 80%.......
-I cannot really disagree with this, especially regarding the hypocrisy of it all. I do think that it is not unreasonable to suggest that traders respect their capital, though.

This has been discussed a lot before... the challenge models are extreme. It's the trade-off that we accept with these remote props. But if they are going to enforce leverage restrictions on selective traders, then they need to clearly define what those limits are so that traders know what they might be getting into. There is just no reason to keep things undefined like this.

With as much frustration as I feel to see this kind of behavior from firms, I also feel similar frustration from greedy and reckless traders that do not give much care or thought to the potential damage that they might be causing and how it might effect the future of this great opportunity for the rest of us. But that's just me.
  • #15,725
  • May 17, 2023 9:29am May 17, 2023 9:29am
Quoting Capablanca
Stolen from prop group. FTMO warning a guy that he is using too much leverage {image} {image} Obviously he is dealing with an absurd leverage. But it's some sort of stupid to provide an enormous amount of leverage and them claiming that he is using too much of what is allowed by themselves.
Man, the shit they come up with.......use all you want in the challenge, but be responsible when live, if they don't want you to use the leverage, don't offer it, reduce it!
Of course, that would need to take place in the challenge as well, resulting in a lower target or more time being offered...... a disruption to their revenue stream of failed challenges.
TBH, despite their longevity, I actually place several firms above FTMO now, for several reasons:
1. FTMO is more expensive by quite a bit, like 15% once you convert their price to USD. Every legit firm is less $$$$
2. They are still on the 10% to make 10% model, where almost all are now 8% target now with 10% DD, of course MFF leads the way with the 8%/12% model.
3. More and more reports of "changing the rules as they see fit" to deny and/or restrict larger payouts.
They are going to need to do something innovative or be left in the dust sooner than later.

Just ran it, FTMO is actually 20% more than MFF for a 200K, (1170 vs. 979) where you get 20K DD to make 20K, and MFF gives you 24K to make 16K........Kind of a no brainer.

If i were just starting today, I'd probably look to max MFF and TFTP BEFORE taking on FTMO.
  • #15,726
  • May 17, 2023 9:57am May 17, 2023 9:57am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Man, the shit they come up with.......use all you want in the challenge, but be responsible when live, if they don't want you to use the leverage, don't offer it, reduce it! Of course, that would need to take place in the challenge as well, resulting in a lower target or more time being offered...... a disruption to their revenue stream of failed challenges. TBH, despite their longevity, I actually place several firms above FTMO now, for several reasons: 1. FTMO is more expensive by quite a bit, like 15% once you convert their price to USD....
if traders would use % of account balance as risk per trade they wouldn t have to worry about leverage. the fact that some state that leverage is +BAD+, is a misconception imho plus BS. the absence of risk management and/or revenge trading or betting the farm aproach is mainly to blame imo. i said Ftmo was nr1 for me till now cos like u said the rules were pretty clear, no hidden agenda, they used to pay traders without issues and wouldn t hear of such nonsence like trading strategy compliance (example>2 many people using it) when u opened a room for funded traders to share ideas and strategies. so ofc i would ve rather payed a premium on the challenge fee then to have to deal with potential BS regarding funded accounts or payouts or rules out of the blue. imo leverage isn t the issue, and yes, they are more expensive then other firms but they had the _track record_ sort of speak going for them. now it s starting to sound like a firm that s walking on the edge. if this continues, with props in general, then a personal acount will become much more apealing imo. funny fact is> whenever i lost a challenge i never received an email tellin me i used 2 much leverage. For me, a prop firm that has record of payouts and clear rules with not much room left for interpretation would be most important. ofc a small target for phase 1, less dollars on fees etc
  • #15,727
  • May 17, 2023 10:16am May 17, 2023 10:16am
Quoting 1odi
{quote} if traders would use % of account balance as risk per trade they wouldn t have to worry about leverage. the fact that some state that leverage is +BAD+, is a misconception imho plus BS. the absence of risk management and/or revenge trading or betting the farm aproach is mainly to blame imo. i said Ftmo was nr1 for me till now cos like u said the rules were pretty clear, no hidden agenda, they used to pay traders without issues and wouldn t hear of such nonsence like trading strategy compliance (example>2 many people using it) when u opened...
Yes, paying more for FTMO, despite higher target, etc. made sense for all of the reasons you mentioned......longevity, hisory of payouts, good trading conditions, clear rules, etc. However, if they are going to start playing games, there are several far better options as far as cost and overall offering(s).
  • #15,728
  • May 17, 2023 10:21am May 17, 2023 10:21am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Yes, paying more for FTMO, despite higher target, etc. made sense for all of the reasons you mentioned......longevity, hisory of payouts, good trading conditions, clear rules, etc. However, if they are going to start playing games, there are several far better options as far as cost and overall offering(s).
Also, with MFF bonus in phase 1 and 2 (which FTMO, of course, doesn't offer) it is like 175% fee refund. So, if you're reinvesting fees you can scale much quicker as well.......pass 1, buy 2 more.
  • #15,729
  • May 17, 2023 10:26am May 17, 2023 10:26am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Also, with MFF bonus in phase 1 and 2 (which FTMO, of course, doesn't offer) it is like 175% fee refund. So, if you're reinvesting fees you can scale much quicker as well.......pass 1, buy 2 more.
never really took that into consideration but i guess it s an added bonus.
  • #15,730
  • May 17, 2023 10:42am May 17, 2023 10:42am
Quoting pipmaster77
TBH, despite their longevity, I actually place several firms above FTMO now, for several reasons: 1. FTMO is more expensive by quite a bit, like 15% once you convert their price to USD. Every legit firm is less $$$$ 2. They are still on the 10% to make 10% model, where almost all are now 8% target now with 10% DD, of course MFF leads the way with the 8%/12% model. 3. More and more reports of "changing the rules as they see fit" to deny and/or restrict larger payouts. They are going to need to do something innovative or be left in the dust sooner...
-Right on all counts. Very true, indeed.

For me, personally, lowering leverage would not hinder me from passing challenges. 1:10 is generally enough for me. I would be curious about whether or not it would bring in more revenue for a firm.
  • #15,731
  • Edited 11:28am May 17, 2023 10:45am | Edited 11:28am
Quoting pipmaster77
However, if they are going to start playing games, there are several far better options as far as cost and overall offering(s).
-Yes. And the longer that time goes by (and people receive payouts from other firms), those other firms are going to have more opportunities to grab a greater share of the market.
  • #15,732
  • May 17, 2023 10:52am May 17, 2023 10:52am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-Right on all counts. Very true, indeed. For me, personally, lowering leverage would not hinder me from passing challenges. 1:10 is generally enough for me. I would be curious about whether or not it would bring in more revenue for a firm.
Yeah, I'm like 1:2 or 1:3 most of the time, never more than 1:5. Crazy what I see some folks doing. So I get the point of why a firm wouldn't want that. What frustrates me is the hypocrisy of gamble in the challenge but not in the live.......but that is the business model, we all know it and for some of us it works. It is just the insult to our intelligence of "we are looking for good traders, just flip an account in 30 days, BUT DON"T YOU DARE FLIP THE ACCOUNT after you are funded! "
  • #15,733
  • May 17, 2023 10:53am May 17, 2023 10:53am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Man, the shit they come up with.......use all you want in the challenge, but be responsible when live, if they don't want you to use the leverage, don't offer it, reduce it! Of course, that would need to take place in the challenge as well, resulting in a lower target or more time being offered...... a disruption to their revenue stream of failed challenges. TBH, despite their longevity, I actually place several firms above FTMO now, for several reasons: 1. FTMO is more expensive by quite a bit, like 15% once you convert their price to USD....
If memory serves me correctly, MFF also has a disdain for people who trade via “all in” and “yolo” style.

Honestly, that guy who posted FTMO’s response is nothing more than someone who farms subs for his YouTube channel & paid social media accounts.

People like that should be taken with a giant grain of salt.
Trade with confidence, trade without fear.
  • #15,734
  • May 17, 2023 11:09am May 17, 2023 11:09am
Quoting Cryptosurf
{quote} If memory serves me correctly, MFF also has a disdain for people who trade via “all in” and “yolo” style. Honestly, that guy who posted FTMO’s response is nothing more than someone who farms subs for his YouTube channel & paid social media accounts. People like that should be taken with a giant grain of salt.
I agree. I have not had one single issue with any of the 4 firms I use. Once again, I understand how to work so none of the issues people complain about affect me.
I even partially agree on the model of higher risk to pass, trade responsibly once funded. TBH, that is the way it should be treated. It takes some good concentrated focus to pass these things, why would you want to blow it.
My issue is, they should all just call it for what it is.....you are going to need to flip an account in 30-45 days and then make 50% more in 60......we will then give you an account that is ACTUALLY 10% of what we state, although you will have the "buying power" of the full amount (but we don't want you to use it all).
I fully understand what it is, as do you, and I still signed up WITH 4 DIFFERENT FIRMS. It is still a great deal, giving you 10-15 times what you would've had trading the "fee" on your own............... if you know what you are doing

Obviously, it wouldn't sell as well when presented for what it actually is.
  • #15,735
  • May 17, 2023 11:15am May 17, 2023 11:15am
Quoting pipmaster77
but that is the business model, we all know it and for some of us it works. It is just the insult to our intelligence of "we are looking for good traders, just flip an account in 30 days, BUT DON"T YOU DARE FLIP THE ACCOUNT after you are funded! "
-Yeah, but as you say, that is the business model. If many traders went crazy (and succeeded), then the business model wouldn't work. We have to accept both sides of the equation.

I do think that promoting traders with huge payouts is going too far, though. If they want to pretend that they are looking for good traders (even though we know that they are not), then that is one thing, but to promote traders with huge payouts and then subsequently try to restrict traders that are trying to do the same, just shows that they made a mistake in doing that. Whether or not they learn from that mistake is another matter. They benefited from the hype/exposure, I'm sure, nonetheless.
  • #15,736
  • May 17, 2023 11:26am May 17, 2023 11:26am
Quoting Cryptosurf
Honestly, that guy who posted FTMO’s response is nothing more than someone who farms subs for his YouTube channel & paid social media accounts.
-If that is true, then that would validate any suspicions that there may be more to this story than what we know, and that FTMO's questionable claim regarding sabotage may not be that far off. We can only speculate, but people like that tend to do crazy things just for views, and will give no thought to blasting an account or fabricating drama just for the content of it.

I think that it is important to make a mental note of these isolated cases. There have been a few posts shared here that were very one-sided in nature and did not tell the full story. These things can add up in people's minds and create a bias, even when the evidence to do so may not be sufficient.
  • #15,737
  • May 17, 2023 11:38am May 17, 2023 11:38am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-If that is true, then that would validate any suspicions that there may be more to this story than what we know, and that FTMO's questionable claim regarding sabotage may not be that far off. We can only speculate, but people like that tend to do crazy things just for views, and will give no thought to blasting an account or fabricating drama just for the content of it. I think that it is important to make a mental note of these isolated cases. There have been a few posts shared here that were very one-sided in nature and did not tell the...
His feed is nothing more then promo's to reel people in. See for yourself: https://twitter.com/andrew_nfx

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: Screenshot_8.png Size: 138 KB
Trade with confidence, trade without fear.
  • #15,738
  • May 17, 2023 11:40am May 17, 2023 11:40am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-Yeah, but as you say, that is the business model. If many traders went crazy (and succeeded), then the business model wouldn't work. We have to accept both sides of the equation. I do think that promoting traders with huge payouts is going too far, though. If they want to pretend that they are looking for good traders (even though we know that they are not), then that is one thing, but to promote traders with huge payouts and then subsequently try to restrict traders that are trying to do the same, just shows that they made a mistake in...

is there any prop firm out there that actually copies trades from great traders, or is it just basically a massive Ponzi funded by losers?
  • #15,739
  • May 17, 2023 12:08pm May 17, 2023 12:08pm
Quoting LehmanBrotha
{quote} is there any prop firm out there that actually copies trades from great traders, or is it just basically a massive Ponzi funded by losers?
Tough question, depends on the firm. Some are using a hybrid type risk model where some trades may be copied, hedged, etc. Others are simply looking for fees with no intention whatsoever of funding anyone. You can usually spot the latter as they have multiple rules, mostly open ended on the interpretation so they violate you for whatever reason they see fit. The more legit firms are pretty clear.....make x%, don't lose x%, with no restrictions on how you accomplish this.
  • #15,740
  • May 17, 2023 12:15pm May 17, 2023 12:15pm
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Man, the shit they come up with.......use all you want in the challenge, but be responsible when live, if they don't want you to use the leverage, don't offer it, reduce it! Of course, that would need to take place in the challenge as well, resulting in a lower target or more time being offered...... a disruption to their revenue stream of failed challenges. TBH, despite their longevity, I actually place several firms above FTMO now, for several reasons: 1. FTMO is more expensive by quite a bit, like 15% once you convert their price to USD....
Yea, I haven't even considered FTMO for nearly 2 years now. Their prices aren't remotely competitive. The only thing they offer is a solid payout history.

I mean their 10K challenge is $168. Seriously?

Everyone else is around $100. With The Funded Muppets (Traders) 50% discount coupon you can get a 10K for $68.
Pride always comes before destruction.... -Proverbs 16:18
120 traders viewing now