FXCM Discussion

Thanks for confirming that, Phylo

Hi Edyraper,

FXCM's prices at the time in question seem to be in line with others as shown in Phylo's post: http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...23#post9120523

Even our ask price (the price at which you can buy) went as low as 1.11665 which is lower than the other chart source you referenced. I assume the low of 1.11860 shown on your second chart is a bid price or some indicative rate. In either case, that price should be lower than FXCM's ask price due to the bid/ask spread. Therefore, it seems your other chart source might be the one that is inaccurate.

In the FXCM Trading Station chart below, I have added three horizontal lines:

1. The blue dotted line shows the lowest bid (sell) price reached during last Friday's Non Farm Payrolls (NFP): 1.11554
2. The red dotted line shows the lowest ask (buy) price reached: 1.11665
3. The purple dotted line shows the low from your other chart source which seems incorrect: 1.11860

If you have additional questions about this, you are welcome to file a trade inquiry.

PS: The video you linked to is about another broker. FXCM has never used the virtual dealer plugin.

You have used something similar in the past for retaining gains derived from asymmetrical positive price slippage.

It makes me laugh my ass off how FXCM claims they are a good broker playing by the rules. They have been fined so many times for numerous things. They come on here acting like they have the trader's best interest like we are a bunch of idiots.

Hey Jason!

I have some questions. First the simple one: Is there any chance to get historical Data of more than 15000 Bars / Periods? I use FXCM trading station and this is the limit. I ask this because I need M5 informations on currencies, especially.

Second question. I cannot comprehend the calculations of some of your indicators / oszilators, in particular the Stochastic. Let's make things simple. I am only interested in the %K, so I will show you my calculation based on common calculations.

%Kt=(C-Ln)/(Hn-Ln)*100

where
Kt is the %K of the period t
n is a subscript and denotes the number of periods (default is 5)
C is the current close price
L is the lowest low within n periods
H is the highest high within n periods

based on this, the %K is calculated as an exponential moving average (EMA).
For the calculation of this, I found:

EMA=(Ct-EMAt-1)*SM+EMAt-1

where
t is a subscript of the calculating period
C is tje current %K (without EMA)
EMA is the EMA of %K
SM is a smoothing factor with SM=2/(n+1), in this case n=5 so SM=0.333...
Since this is an unsolvable problem, I set the very first value of EMA (EMAt-1000=%K-1000). There should be enough periods to smooth it.

A variation between bid and ask does not help, nor does a smoothing factor of SM=1/n like sometimes proposed.
I will give a screenshot of the differences.
So, can you explain, how FXCM does calculate the Stochastic? And I request you to be as precise and detailed as I am, since the calculation seems to be a little complex. That would be very kind :-)


Hope you can see the screenshot. Column J represents the results of Stochastic %K that I downloaded from FXCM trading station. Columns L and M are my calculations.

Consistent with Futures market too.

While FXCM did not pass on positive slippage prior to 2010 (we used to fill limit orders at the exact prices clients originally requested), we have never used anything similar to the virtual dealer plugin which goes beyond simply not passing on positive slippage.

It's also worth noting that as part of our settlement with regulators regarding positive slippage, we fully reimbursed current and former clients for any positive slippage they did not receive prior to 2010. As a result of the changes we made that year, FXCM passes all available positive slippage onto our clients in full and for all order types. Furthermore, we make the execution data proving this fact freely available to all traders.

In addition, our Trading Station platform provides traders with order features like Market Range and Range Entry to help them minimize their negative slippage on Market Orders and Entry Orders respectively while still receiving the full benefits of any potential positive slippage that's available in the market. The latest FXCM execution stats showed the following:

1. 78.71% of all orders had NO SLIPPAGE.
2. 12.77% of all orders received positive slippage.
3. 8.52% of all orders received negative slippage.
4. 50.02% of all limit and limit entry orders received positive slippage.
5. 39.9% of all stop and stop entry orders received negative slippage.

How do you feel about brokers that may withhold positive slippage from their clients and don't make their execution stats publicly available to this day?

Name another retail forex broker that's regulated on 6 continents. Our sheer size means we are subject to a greater level of scrutiny than smaller firms with fewer clients. FXCM holds itself accountable to financial rules and standards for transparency the offshore/unregulated brokers you advocate can't hope to meet or at the very least try to evade.

In 2006, FXCM pioneered No Dealing Desk (NDD) execution in the retail forex industry specifically to align our interests with those of our clients. With the NDD model, we offset each client order one-for-one with the best prices from competing liquidity providers, and don't profit from client losses, or lose from client profits. Instead, FXCM profits from client trading volume. That means we want our clients to be profitable, so they can trade more.

In addition to execution and market data transparency, traders also value innovation. That's why FXCM continually looks to create new tools to help our clients. Examples include the release of real volume indicators, real-time SSI indicators, a new HTML 5 platform currently in beta, the latest Trading Station Desktop update, our Trading Analytics portal, and the newly released Market Depth indicator to name a few recent developments. I think you would be hard-pressed to find another broker that takes the same level of interest we do in enhancing our clients' trading experience and innovates on such a continuous basis.

Hi Chris,

You should be able to find what you need on FXCMapps.com with one of the three versions of the Historical Data Downloader.

While I don't know these formulas myself, if you email techsupport AT fxcm DOT com, then one of our platform specialists can help you find the information you need for the various indicators about which you have questions.

Thanks for confirming that, Bilstein

Jason,
I am frustrated. I chatted this morning with FXCM. Someone was suppose to reach out to me this afternoon; have heard nothing.
I want to back test, forward test or just put an EA into action; I can't seem to get anything going.

I'm working with a Demo (although I have a live account) I've given up on testing my EA, I'll just apply it to my Demo and watch it....but I can't even do that.
I have dragged it over. Little smiley face is in the corner, but I have no other reasons to think it's working. Shouldn't there be a button someplace to go live and initiate trades? I've had an EA running for weeks on this account and not one trade has been placed.

I have played around a lot; I've got several EA's I've downloaded. Not sure what is what any longer.
Do you have any suggestions?

Hi Rebecca,

It may be your demo account settings. Please send me a private message with your demo username and password. Also, if you include the email address we have on file for your account, I can use that to pull up your details and check with my colleagues regarding the follow up you are expecting from them.

Jason
You say price is direct from banks, on FXCM website write ''adding a markup to the spreads it receives from its liquidity providers for certain account types, and adding a markup to rollover'',i now think the end of price and spreads is not same with banks?

What that means is that if the spread on a pair among liquidity providers is, let's say 0.2, FXCM adds a markup to that (usually 1-2 pips) so the spread you see on your platform would be 1.2 or 2.2 using that example. Same for the rollover, they'll take some change out of rollover on a given trade held past 5:00PM EST.

FXCM has two different account types, one is run on their NDD execution model and the other is run through an in-house dealing desk where they act as the market maker. On the standard account, you're fed the raw spreads which fluctuate with liquidity, sometimes they even go negative. On a dealing desk account, you're fed the raw spread plus the 1-2 pip markup (FXCM's compensation). On a standard account, we get charged flat commissions based on volume in exchange for raw (or "bank") spreads. FXCM runs a "hybrid" execution model wherein smaller traders hold "mini" accounts and are usually thrown on a DD model while larger accounts are put on their NDD execution model. The difference between the two execution models is that there's an inherent conflict of interest with the broker acting as your market maker. I'd call it a "double conflict" because, while LP's are already messing with our heads, having your broker do it to just doubles the headache.

Their pricing engine (they call it "best bid-best offer") takes bids and offers from liquidity providers - I think they have like, 11 or 12 of them - and feed clients the best price(s) available of the bunch.

All brokers do the same thing; they get prices from LPs and feed them to you for trading. The difference is who's on the opposite side of your trade. If your broker is the market maker, than it's usually him or her; if you win, they lose, if you lose, they win. If not, they offset your order 1-for-1 (meaning they buy or sell on your behalf) with their respective LPs.

The reason(s) they do this are:
(1) Retail traders in general lose money.
*This is why most brokers act as their own market makers.

(2) Smaller traders lose faster because they abuse leverage.
*The risk associated with this is why it's "safer" to keep their trades in-house.
*Money lost by clients goes to the broker.
*Negative balances are inconsequential.

(3) Larger retail traders typically lose money slower (or make it, lol).
*It's less risky to offset their trades with LPs.
*Money lost by clients goes to LPs.
*Negative balances are problematic.

Given as much, a DD execution model typically generates less risky revenue for retail brokers. If your account goes bust, or negative, they aren't on the hook for anything since your money wound up in their pocket. To FXCM's credit, after what happened with the SNB fiasco, I'm surprised they even kept their NDD model around but it made sense that they increased depository requirements for those types of accounts. On an NDD model, if your account goes bust, that's on you. However, if it goes negative, it puts the broker in a position where they have to collect on the debt (due to clearing obligations) from a client who may not be able to afford it which, in itself, comes with more costs for the broker in the event of litigation, collection services, or whatever.

Realistically speaking, a DD model isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, if you're making too much money, usually the broker will either offer to upgrade your account type (good broker) or freeze your account (bad broker).

Thank you,
May FXCM adding a markup to the spreads in standard and active accounts?

Bilstein's post explains it well. (Thanks, B! )

FXCM provides No Dealing Desk (NDD) forex execution to all Standard accounts (5k minimum) and Active Trader accounts (25k minimum) where each client order is offset one-for-one with the best prices from competing liquidity providers.



On the NDD model, FXCM profits from the commission, not any markups to the spread. Therefore, the overwhelming majority of Standard and Active Trader accounts have no markups* added to the NDD spreads.

We also offer Mini accounts ($50 minimum) which use DD execution. Since no commissions are charged with this account type, there is a markup added to Mini account spreads.

Welcome to the forum, Newage! Please let me know if you have additional questions.


* Exceptions are NDD spread betting accounts for UK and Ireland residents (since regulations prohibit us from charging commissions on that account type) and a small minority of NDD accounts opened through introducing brokers who choose to add their own markup to the spread as compensation for some value-added service they provide to their clients such as premium charts or trading signals.

It helps to consider your needs and trading style when choosing a broker or, in the case of a broker that uses hybrid execution models; your account type.

NDD accounts are good if you consider yourself a high frequency trader and/or scalper. Firstly for the obvious reasons that, if you're trying to get a point or two out of the market and you're pushin' volume, having to overcome a 2.5+ point spread makes it difficult to make money. Secondly, broker dealing desks DO typically employ virtual dealer software. Not because they're "evil" but because the sheer volume of transactions is impossible to manage manually. Dealer software - whether it's MT4's plugin or say, Ashira - is typically designed and marketed to combat scalpers, arbitrageurs, and high frequency traders because if you're good at it, the dealer (broker) loses money. If the broker allows themselves to lose money, the broker can lose regulatory capital or operating capital.

Upside: No conflict of interest, no strategy restrictions, usually comes with better service(s) from the broker.
Downside: Large deposit requirements.

DD accounts are good for "casual" or "passive traders." You've got some spare money lying around, you wanna take a crack at trading spot currencies, and you have no real strategy; a dealing desk-type account or broker will more than suffice. They'll usually offer you things like "guaranteed fills/stops" or "fixed spreads" or "competitive rollover" or "negative balance protection." All of which cannot be given to you when it comes to clearing houses and liquidity providers.

Upside: Low deposit requirements, marketable perceived advantages (if applicable).
Downside: Conflict of interest with the broker, strategy limitations (whether in writing or implied).

And, we still have no answer from Jason Rogers about this: http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...40#post8809440.

More evidence of the unethical practices of FXCM and why Jason Rogers constantly avoids my posts:

http://indo-investasi.com/showthread...tomer-Accounts



And, this:

http://www.forexfactory.com/showthre...34#post5891634

Now, when you are dealing with someone who lies constantly, you will note that they never answer a direct question with any degree of candor as this link demonstrates about FXCM:

https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threa...ection.169495/

I asked a very direct and very straight forward question and was give a nonsequitur reply about a White Label arrangement with another company. That was not my question and I made that clear several times to FXCM who refused to answer the question honestly. This is what you are dealing with in FXCM.

Notice how Jason Rogers, posts a question to me immediately afterwards that completed avoids my underlying question, as though I could not and/or did not read the OP itself which was in fact, the very first post in the thread by definition.

What kind of company behaves this way?

The primary reason we don't get straight answers from FXCM or Jason Rogers is because FXCM has placed its Employees online in forums. If you expose FXCM and its unethical practices to the light of day, FXCM uses its Employees to destroy your perfectly fine threads and they will even go as far as creating fictitious stories linked to the names of its own customers. Again, what kind of company does that?

The proof? Right here: https://elitetrader.com/et/threads/t...1#post-3607707.

I was on EliteTrader posting Trade Profiles and having discussion about my research as I had been doing for many years in the online trading community from Stocks, Stock Options and Forex. When I posted on EliteTrader, one of the most useless forums in the entire online trading community I discovered later, I was attacked by a user named Atticus. Atticus, mysteriously disappears in 2013, after I posted a video of a weekend trip I took to a friends house where we had some fun in my Veyron at the track. The video was a compilation of a vacation I had taken to Cabo and some other stuff. The video was put together years before I posted on EliteTrader. The only reason I posted the video was to demonstrate the silly behavior of Atticus, the FXCM Employee.

Atticus, after making a fool of himself, then slipped up and posted something in another thread that got him busted:




This explains how and why Atticus and Jason Rogers were using my name with a fictitious nonsensical "section 8 tax lien" story. Both Atticus and Jason Rogers are FXCM Employees. Atticus, was used as some kind of attack dog on EliteTrader.



And, Atticus (The FXCM Empolyee) was ranked by at least one member as one of the top three least liked posters on EliteTrader: https://elitetrader.com/et/threads/l...osters.290974/



Again, what kind of reputable Forex Company behaves this way?