WTS made like $8000 off of me through clearing fees from negotiated rates. They made $4000 through other fess (mostly platform fees) for Fusion. Then they made over $1300 off of me for profit sharing. So yeah, they took almost $13,000 from my account themselves. I also paid Other fees (SEC I guess) and ECN fees, but that's just the cost of making a trade. I grossed nearly $46,000, but netted nearly $5000 in the markets after WTS clearing fees, SEC fees, and ECN fees. So if you take away the cut WTS took for each trade the net would be $13,000. I'm hell bent on being a trader, because it's a meritocracy. There's no bs and your results speak for themselves.
I've known so many more or less successful traders who don't know what a "martingale" is but still are able to comprehend some sort of risk management. I would jump on hiring a math student who cared about trading (but of course I know no one who is hiring). But I think you will find a job if you want one. One piece of advice you might consider is slightly expanding your job description. For example, would you be willing to be in the back office where they keep track of risk?
It depends on whether or not it can lead to a trading position. I don't want to be a back office guy forever. From my understanding at banks once you're in a back office position it's almost impossible to get out. However, it's supposedly easier at hedge funds. I want them to understand that my goal is not to be in the back office forever and I want to be a trader someday. As long as they can accept that that's my long term goal I'm open to back/middle office positions. If they can't accept that when they ask where do I want to be in 5 years and I say trader then I don't want to work there. I'm not going to just tell people what they want to hear, I'm going to be honest.
You need to understand that a "job" at a place like WTS is a liability. What it shows is that you overvalued your ability, undervalued your time and allowed yourself to get milked for fees. That's going to be the concern of most interviewers coming in so it might be good to address those concerns directly. Secondly, you are coming in as entry level with no relevant work experience. There are very few legit firms who are going to hire entry level people to trade who aren't from the absolute top 5 schools in the country and have some good programming experience. Training traders is time consuming and costly - they need to spend their effort on people who they feel have a high probability of success. So I think the front door is closed to you which means you should try a side door and above all you need relevant experience. Back office is generally too removed but a middle office position would probably be ideal if you can get it. EVERYONE in the middle office wants to trade so you don't need to harp on that. It's a given. But the more you press it your interviewer might get concerned that you wouldn't be taking the offered job seriously and would spend too much time politicking for a trading job. This is not a booming industry. Lots of trading firms have been shedding jobs for quite some time now so you might want to consider other career options soon.
I went there, because I had no trading experience and it was my only option other than opening an account with a broker. WTS allowed me to day trade though where as I would have needed $25,000 with a broker. I also got .30/1000 and 80% which I thought was a good deal so it had its benefits.
I second that. Depending on your strategy, keep in mind that there are other asset classes aside from stocks, where no such minimum applies.
You are asking how to break in. I've done hundreds of trading interviews and I'm telling you what I see as a problem with your work history. And if I see it as a problem you can bet that others will also. Sure, you can choose to defend your decision but the minute you start 'defending' you show that you are not actually listening and the interview is over.
Another point is that that the structure of the industry has radically changed do to automation. They read a story about how it "used to work" and think it still applies, when it mostly does not. Firms used to have a real incentive to train up much more people, as those people were needed to help the firm get scale on it's edge. For the new trader this allowed a time where they were taught an edge and had a good opportunity to participate/observe, and perhaps learn other stuff (if such a person was to go on to larger success). Today this does not happen nearly as much. All a firm needs now is the few smartest guys and programmers. They don't need the mass of "trainees" because they are no longer needed to get scale. Unless one is a very experienced markets person (can document ability to find edges) or a high aptitude programmer, the door is closed, basically. The unfortunate thing is if u do "get in the door" it will most likely be with a firm that is simply looking for you to churn equity and burn out - not a great opportunity but a major time waster. And as another person said, the industry is not growing right now, so it is doubly tough.
Gotcha, yeah, I have no real work experience where I had to get up and go to work every morning. I had a problem before going to WTS that firms were unsure if I liked trading, because I had no trading experience. Now nobody can say that I haven't demonstrated an interest in trading, but like you said, I have no real work experience and I understand it's a red flag to some firms.