i didn't know Platform 1 was ChoiceFX software until i saw this post and got to the download page. it seems they didn't want to be clear who provided the platform softwares. i had chosen to demo Platform 2 (Fortex software) thinking both options were variations of the same provider. i couldn't find Fibonacci drawing tools on both Platform 1 (ChoiceFX) nor Platform 2 (Fortex) and ChoiceFX only a few more indicators than Fortex. with such lacking technical charts, the savings from the low spreads and commissions may have to be used to pay 3rd party charting software like eSignal or IntelliChart. i would rather forgo the low spreads for the convenience of good chartings from MetaTrader4 or DealBook360 (my current broker).
bstay: but that's the case with most ecn platforms, most of them don't have charts at all, and if they do have charts, its pretty barebone. Its execution only, desiged for the pro segment which is supposed to have their own means of analyzing the market, through what ever software they deem appropriate.
Advanced Markets is not an ECN. Just to clarify, ECN's match client to client, which is why many times trades only get filled for what there is a match for. In other words, if you want to execute a trade for 1 mil, and a client has a resting order for 100k , and you match that trade , you only get filled for 100k. ECN's also take in hedge fund pricing, and clients posting orders. These hedge funds, and the way the banks price ECN's, allow last look at the trades before executing, which leads to high rejection rates if they do not like the flow. At Advanced Markets, all trades are executed by banks only. No last look. So if the bank posts a price, that is a live executable rate. This results in very few rejections, usually only if there is a technology problem at one of the banks. In response to the platforms of Currenex, Fortex, etc.. These are just software companies, and are only as good as the pricing or liquidity coming in. Rejections, spreads, performance are all a result of the Brokers or FCM's relationship with the banks and liquidity providers.
Still - its too expensive. Others start with $20/m and go down from there. Granted, most require a higher inital deposit and you can't trade miniscule amounts there. This fee schedule just isn't viable - considering the competition.
Pippi, I agree with you. However, if the spreads are even 1/10th tigher, the brokerage fee is washed out. Don't get obsessed with the fees. Look at the overall spreads and more importantly execution. Being able to get in and out of the market when i want is worth the money. I plan to test ami's demo and post comments at a later date.
I agree, if execution is 0.1 to 0.3 pips better on average, the fees are not that important. But it's really hard to tell on a 0.1 pip level which firm provides better fills in the longer term. I wouldn't know how to do a fair comparison between 2 firms on such a small level (guessing you would have to use api since you can't click this fast).