Prop Firm Hub | Page 1034 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Featured US Prop Firms

Similar Threads

Anyone trading with a Prop firm 31 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

  • #20,661
  • Sep 4, 2023 11:47pm Sep 4, 2023 11:47pm
This is why it is vital to look at the founders of the firm one invest in if one is wanting something stable that is not risky. Personally I dislike the idea to invest in something which lives off of others misery. Then to get paid off of others misery the losers accounts instead of real live market. Basically makes it identical to poker in theory how the sharks looked for the fish tables. It just feels very dirty and nasty. If one got 0 morals 0 guilt to earn cash in anyway I have no idea what you even do here since there must be way better options for such people since literally the whole economic system is based on 0 morals just being a predator. Or maybe prop firm trading is just for the more laid back type of economic predators.

The quest to find a prop firm which doesn't prey on the losers as main profit source is yet to be found. Private investors I assume is the only viable option.
The only prop firms I know of which seems to use some kind of profit from live trading is FTMO it uses both models when asked in support they claim only source is live trading for profit but I doubt that of course. Earn2trade but its founder got bad record so also risky and you are forced to file yourself as professional trader if using funded account with them since its live which got its drawbacks.

Basically prop firms became the new poker industry. So no wonder regulators are licking their mouths now.
  • #20,662
  • Sep 4, 2023 11:49pm Sep 4, 2023 11:49pm
Quoting 1odi
{quote} Also, the people that suposed to Regulate the markets don t know how the markets really work? what are they doing there then? we assume a lot of things but in the end it ain t gonna change the outcome of this crap. i don t know, it all just sounds a little fishy. EDIT> on a second thought, they might be in those positions without actually knowing how the markets really work. there s so much of that going around these days, unbelievable. i m done speculating..i m gonna keep tradin prop firms till the end of time ...
If I was the CFTC in this case, I would have interviewed MFF before releasing anything. The process is weird, there are investigators, then the ones who do depositions and then the trial lawyers. So the same person who investigated isnt the same one who does charges and isnt the same one who goes to court. I suspect a lot of people in the process don't know how the market works. I think also, the commission comment is sufficient to assume that they dont know the market.
  • #20,663
  • Sep 4, 2023 11:49pm Sep 4, 2023 11:49pm
Quoting Takisd
{quote} But you see. They didn't mark up the spreads. The accusation is that they added "some sort of mark up". They don't know what it is, and it just looks like they have choked on a fatty not realizing what real market conditions are. This will be thrown out really fast with a simple positive slippage history. Even if 1 trade has positive slippage on an account in STP it means its a bs claim.
I may be wrong but that's what I took reading this:

Quote
70. For customers on STP, Traders Global uses its specialized software to impose an additional “spread” on the price feed visible to STP’d customers. This spread results in a customer seeing—and believing himself or herself to be executed at—a worse price than what Traders Global got from the Dealer. It allows Traders Global to give less money to a winning customer and, for a losing customer, terminate the account before the losses reach the drawdown limit. (Though it will appear to the customer that he or she exceeded the drawdown limit.)...

My understanding reading this was that MFF was passing to STP traders what MFF got from their Dealer, adding a mark-up on spread.
If that was the case I don't think was fair because these were already stp traders, dealing with the normal and difficult real market conditions + commission.
  • #20,664
  • Sep 4, 2023 11:50pm Sep 4, 2023 11:50pm
Quoting labu
This is why it is vital to look at the founders of the firm one invest in if one is wanting something stable that is not risky. Personally I dislike the idea to invest in something which lives off of others misery. Then to get paid off of others misery the losers accounts instead of real live market. Basically makes it identical to poker in theory how the sharks looked for the fish tables. It just feels very dirty and nasty. If one got 0 morals 0 guilt to earn cash in anyway I have no idea what you even do here since there must be way better options...
No prop firm is making money off live trading. Its pie in the sky ideas to think that they are. Retail trader hopium to think that there are a group of long term profitable traders that a firm will a-book and collect their 10% split.
  • #20,665
  • Sep 4, 2023 11:52pm Sep 4, 2023 11:52pm
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} I may be wrong but that's what I took reading this: {quote} My understanding reading this was that MFF was passing to STP traders what MFF got from their Dealer, adding a mark-up on spread. If that was the case I don't think was fair because these were already stp traders, dealing with the normal and difficult real market conditions + commission.
Given the ticket sizes of prop firms, it doesn't surprise me that STP results in decaying market conditions. And from a sales/marketing perspective, there is a reason you don't give those conditions to everyone.

Edit: The reason why I say its decaying, is because whoever wrote this suggests that Mff wanted customers on a-book to lose.
  • #20,666
  • Sep 5, 2023 12:22am Sep 5, 2023 12:22am
Quoting Takisd
{quote} Given the ticket sizes of prop firms, it doesn't surprise me that STP results in decaying market conditions. And from a sales/marketing perspective, there is a reason you don't give those conditions to everyone.
I'm probably lacking knowledge about how this works behind walls but what I understood from the document was that some traders were moved to STP.

For those MFF would deposit in their dealer (broker ?) the equivalent to the max DD and that would eliminate MFF risk, limiting the max loss of MFF to that amount.

So, to me this trader was now dealing with the Dealer (broker?) in real market. If he decided to trade 50 lots or do 20 trades per minute in real market he would already suffer the real market conditions from the Dealer (broker?). Why adding something on the top of it ?

What's your view on this ?

Quoting Takisd
Edit: The reason why I say its decaying, is because whoever wrote this suggests that Mff wanted customers on a-book to lose.

Yep, it's stupid to think they wanted A-people to lose. In fact it's the contrary. The A-customers were the only ones where MFF was profiting from if they won.
What they said, and it's a completely different thing, if that A-customers don't have hedge and will eventually lose.

Quote
96. In a June 22, 2022, email with the subject line, “STP discussion,” the Advisor told Traders Global Employee A: “I think we need to all subscribe to the concept that your clients will almost never have alpha. None of them will make money on real market conditions because they are good. Some will because they are lucky.

Returning to what I said before, it seems to me that the markup on STP was to decrease the payout and/or avoid losing the whole deposit. Meaning that if customer had a 24K max DD, MFF would deposit 24K in the Dealer but would lose maybe 20K with this markup technique when the A-customer busted.
  • #20,667
  • Sep 5, 2023 12:24am Sep 5, 2023 12:24am
Quoting TrAndy1
I only can warn you against 5ers. If regulators step in you need to pay back all your gains and you get your challenge fees also back. Everything is set to ZERO when they come. It is simply not allowed to take any real money as trader without having a license. Either you as trader needs a financial advisor license or the prop firm needs to be licensed. WITHOUT a license it is just big crime and nothing else.
I was thinking of signing up with 5ers but your statement do make sense to be about licence. I also recall a while ago reading through Oanda's terms of business (if I remember correctly) if you wish someone else to trade/manage your account then you need to have a Power of Attorney get done. I am not sure a contract that you sign with prop firm (assuming if there is a genuine ones out there) is it equivalent to a Power of Attorney? What is your opinion on this. Having heard of all that is going on in the prop firm industry I think will trade my own money with a regulated broker.
  • #20,668
  • Sep 5, 2023 12:29am Sep 5, 2023 12:29am
Quoting gem29
{quote} I was thinking of signing up with 5ers but your statement do make sense to be about licence. I also recall a while ago reading through Oanda's terms of business (if I remember correctly) if you wish someone else to trade/manage your account then you need to have a Power of Attorney get done. I am not sure a contract that you sign with prop firm (assuming if there is a genuine ones out there) is it equivalent to a Power of Attorney? What is your opinion on this. Having heard of all that is going on in the prop firm industry I think will trade...
Probably the best to wait until the dust settles with prop firms and until then trading on personal account at regular fx broker, I think so too. But I am already involved into prop firms, so I will continue trading them but I won't buy any new challenges at all.
  • #20,669
  • Sep 5, 2023 12:47am Sep 5, 2023 12:47am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} I'm probably lacking knowledge about how this works behind walls but what I understood from the document was that some traders were moved to STP. For those MFF would deposit in their dealer (broker ?) the equivalent to the max DD and that would eliminate MFF risk, limiting the max loss of MFF to that amount. So, to me this trader was now dealing with the Dealer (broker?) in real market. If he decided to trade 50 lots or do 20 trades per minute in real market he would already suffer the real market conditions from the Dealer (broker?). Why...
Possibly. But its likely just as simple as their price feed remained consistent whether you were stp or not. So there was no deviation of trading conditions. The provider possibly had a retail top of book with a 0.01 lot spread narrower. Its hard to tell. But either way if positive slippage can be proven on that matter it throws it out into the toilet because it would indicate that a trader got a better price than requested and the premise of the argument is that it was built to make the trader lose. Without thinking there is some evil scheme going on, price feed consistency would make a lot of sense. Imagine if prop traders all had different feeds based on the type of trader they are (real world scenario) what a mess that would be, scalpers would scream the loudest as their eur/usd spread goes above 0.6 permanently.
  • #20,670
  • Sep 5, 2023 1:32am Sep 5, 2023 1:32am
Quoting akwaig
Any information on this one, please? https://hub.instantfunding.io/
Good reviews on trustpilot...
  • #20,671
  • Sep 5, 2023 1:33am Sep 5, 2023 1:33am
Quoting Takisd
{quote} Possibly. But its likely just as simple as their price feed remained consistent whether you were stp or not. So there was no deviation of trading conditions. The provider possibly had a retail top of book with a 0.01 lot spread narrower. Its hard to tell. But either way if positive slippage can be proven on that matter it throws it out into the toilet because it would indicate that a trader got a better price than requested and the premise of the argument is that it was built to make the trader lose. Without thinking there is some evil scheme...
Yes, I agree. Some things, if proven, would void a lot of what is in the accusation. It's a bit strange that the case has these contradictory statements. If we see it how can't CFTC attorneys see it either. It should be a bit of common sense.

For the last pargraph, I believe the profile stuff was more for hitting different profiles with different slippage (and maybe execution delays), despite all them seeing the same spreads (maybe just not the stps, I don't know). Otherwise would be a mess as you said. Different profiles looking at different spreads. And the same across props.
  • #20,672
  • Sep 5, 2023 1:43am Sep 5, 2023 1:43am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Yes, I agree. Some things, if proven, would void a lot of what is in the accusation. It's a bit strange that the case has these contradictory statements. If we see it how can't CFTC attorneys see it either. It should be a bit of common sense. For the last pargraph, I believe the profile stuff was more for hitting different profiles with different slippage (and maybe execution delays), despite all them seeing the same spreads (maybe just not the stps, I don't know). Otherwise would be a mess as you said. Different profiles looking at different...
I can see a lot of like "catch 22" type elements of the accusations. Where to disprove one thing, you need to admit to another. At the same time you need to teach a lesson to people who should know better, but also there is proof that the advisor had stated clearly that there is performance decay when you stp traders so its best to use profiles. Its so complicated.

Then you have clickbait people talking about ponzi, i think we can all agree, prop firms are not a ponzi at least in the black and white description of the word. Watching people operating prop firms call prop firms ponzi is really weird as well. But it is just proving the age old tale of the participants in the market place dont know the market they are participating in. Maybe the Dodd Frank act is right afterall, traders are too stupid to know where to spend their money and big brother should tell us all what to do.
  • #20,673
  • Sep 5, 2023 1:56am Sep 5, 2023 1:56am
Quoting TrAndy1
{quote} No problem. I am not connected anything to Bespoke and I only invested a small amount of money. 8k for fees is not much money for me. You know I trade for a hedge fund too getting regularly 5-figure payouts monthly. After reviewing 30+ new prop firms, Bespoke became my number 1 (after MFF). My posting shows this as result of my opinion I built over time here. And I have hands-on experience with them too. So I can tell you something on them. With most others I cannot say much. Alpha Capital is good and FXIFY I also think too. But they only...
If u trade indeces forget about Goat Funding. 7$ for lot commission . 7 pips. I opened 4 lots and commission was 28$. Also someone mentioned fidelcrest, do not touch I been asking them for fee refund around 10 days and also once my small withdrawal took them 10 days I jumped maybe 10 times to support. Also smartprop , after 3 months I asked for scalling and was told by support that scalling is after 4 months, but website was saying 3 months. It was solved directly by Ryan he scalled my account immediately, but the way I was took care by support was bad. They told me on support that they consulted about this scalling with Ryan and is definitely 4 months. This small things are signs what to avoid.
  • #20,674
  • Sep 5, 2023 2:08am Sep 5, 2023 2:08am
Any suggest broker good for indeces with 1:100 allowable leverage for indeces and small first deposit for try?? No Ic markets and Vantage FX already got account with them.
  • #20,675
  • Sep 5, 2023 2:13am Sep 5, 2023 2:13am
Quoting Lrg
{quote} Good reviews on trustpilot...
from their rules:
"It's worth mentioning that opening and closing trades within close proximity to each other is prohibited. This is a popular method for traders to 'get around' trading, however, we do not allow this as it is still a form of layering, also known as stacking."
Money is made by sitting, not trading
  • #20,676
  • Sep 5, 2023 2:21am Sep 5, 2023 2:21am
Quoting Vitore
{quote} from their rules: "It's worth mentioning that opening and closing trades within close proximity to each other is prohibited. This is a popular method for traders to 'get around' trading, however, we do not allow this as it is still a form of layering, also known as stacking."
Why would be bad to buy
- 1 lot at 1.2050
- 1 lot at 1.2045
and not be bad to buy
- 2 lots at 1.2047

I don't get it
  • #20,677
  • Sep 5, 2023 2:22am Sep 5, 2023 2:22am
Quoting youngD
Any suggest broker good for indeces with 1:100 allowable leverage for indeces and small first deposit for try?? No Ic markets and Vantage FX already got account with them.
1:100 for indices??? well TFF offers that for example but it is crazy high. Even 1:10 is enough when you trade prop account where this actually represent 1:100 (considering you only trade 10% of the account but your margin is the full 100%)
Money is made by sitting, not trading
  • #20,678
  • Sep 5, 2023 2:24am Sep 5, 2023 2:24am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Why would be bad to buy - 1 lot at 1.2050 - 1 lot at 1.2045 and not be bad to buy - 2 lots at 1.2047 I don't get it
Neither do I so I stay away from them. Moreover, and as usual, they don't specify what the "close proximity" actually means. So it is up to their discretion...
Money is made by sitting, not trading
  • #20,679
  • Sep 5, 2023 2:27am Sep 5, 2023 2:27am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Why would be bad to buy - 1 lot at 1.2050 - 1 lot at 1.2045 and not be bad to buy - 2 lots at 1.2047 I don't get it
because it makes it easier for you to game their size-based slippage filter?
  • #20,680
  • Sep 5, 2023 2:40am Sep 5, 2023 2:40am
Quoting Vitore
{quote} 1:100 for indices??? well TFF offers that for example but it is crazy high. Even 1:10 is enough when you trade prop account where this actually represent 1:100 (considering you only trade 10% of the account but your margin is the full 100%)
It's the old question about indexes in props. There are different equivalences for lot sizes and it's not easy to see, even in specifications.

I did a tabe many time ago when I considered trading indices in props. There were at least 3 different size.
Not sure how it's now but in E8, TFF and MFF 1 lot was $1 per point (so 1 lot would be buying 4500 USD aprox if today).
TFT was 10 per point
And Blue was 50(!) per point

If one screwed this could end up with a huge position, if not an immediate violation.
65 traders viewing now