Has anyone tried Speed Up Trader - a company set up by Marcello Arrambide, the founder of Day Trading Academy? They say they will fund me an account of up to 100k if I pay them 300 first then pass their test. After you pass, you get to trade a 100k account with a maximum of 12 contracts and keep the first 7k and 80% of the profits afterward. How hard is their test? Is it measured by cumulative profit or just sum total of the recent x number of days? Do I need to pay 300$ every time I fail the test and have to start again? I am just wondering if this whole thing is a scam or not...
Funny video ... "It's not your system or your discipline ... You simply need more money" lol It's $300 month Plus data (and who knows what else) 15 days and no minimum number of trades is too loose of requirements. Why not simply use a free paper trading account and do the challenge for (almost) free? If you must pay, then there's a very helpful sponsor here @Earn2Trade-Ryan.
I have no idea but as far as I can tell, they are not registered with the NFA and are conducting a futures business and charging a fee vs passing through the cost of trading against your P/L. I would ask a lot of questions.
Not sure but i think TST, OneUp and Earn2Trade are not registered with the NFA either. There are definitely some more questions that need to be asked, a few i can think of are about the trading platform, the loss limit, ...
Hello! We welcome any questions. We have gone to great lengths in discussions with our regulatory attorneys and the NFA to make sure everything we do is in compliance with applicable regulations. At this time, Earn2Trade and the prop firm have no NFA regulatory requirements. Earn2Trade is not the prop firm that funds the traders and simply acts as an education and recruitment firm. The prop firm that does fund the traders does not treat traders as independent contractors (which may have CTA registration requirements) as many other firms do. Instead Helios brings the traders on as members of their LLC and thus, per the NFA, removes the regulatory requirements.
.....m merky waters...IMHO Firms like Bright and others are regulated but these "Pay for test and we may fund you" models are not! LOL charging many for a "test" and then to pretend that some of that money does not go towards actual funding .. ! Hell... it is easy I am going to start one tomorrow 1) Give me $500 for a "test...( to make it sound value for money I will give you 3 months of sim for it) 2) Many will fail , I pocket $500 , those few who pass I# will fund you becasue in the following there is no risk to me at all! How simple the 500 goes in my pocket, I then use a discount broker (who only needs $300 as day trading margin for 1 ES )and allow you to trade a whopping $130,000 + ( approx 1ES notional ) With a loss limit of $300 I pocket the $200 + % of any profits you may make! One day we are going to see some news from regulators or a major newspaper on this questionable business model, hope that news is not caused by some of these "prop" firms going belly up! # when I say I will fund you, I mean "my firm will only be a education firm a so called third party would be the Funding party) a Win win ( for me)
I don't think it's that easy ... Got to set up some infrastructure and establish some relationships. Deal with noobs, paper work. The turnover must be huge. I wander if they get to share some percentage of the split if the account gets funded. That would be more attractive. Who is stopping people from paper trading for free and only applying once one is certain to pass quickly? I don't really see anything questionable with this any more than any other trading education/software offerings.
Qlai, I was simplifying it and being sarcastic to show the underlying maths.. sure there are marketing expenses etc Yes no body is stopping people from paper trading for free.. but many people are are not that aware about this industry.. all they see is the carrot "anybody can get funded" Your point about nothing being questionable.. do read various criticism around various forums re "Hamster wheel approach" Questionable parts are.... 1) Carrot 2) hamster wheel approach 3) method of marketing 4) Non disclosure of how many % really get funded 5) Using notional value ( hence my example of Funding to the the tune of $130000 with just $500 in pocket etc) 6) Why is the testing firm is separate from the funding firm ( to avoid regulations!) Can you tell us why the top tier Props don't do this BS of test fees? It all comes down to the TRUE intention of the business re "other trading education/software offerings " WOW " If these so called gurus are so good why would they sell the system? why are they either not making millions by trading ( not by selling seminars) or managing a regulated fund... simple reason they don't is becasue they will be scrutinized, will have to go through regulatory hurdles Take a simple a education/ system seller and a CTA both promote them selves in terms of their " strategy" people risk real money ( apart from paying the " education fee") a CTA is scrutinized where as education seller goes Scot free... it is easier to sell courses then trade...by the way please don't put forward the age old argument that do universities give any guarantee that you will make money while they charge for their "Courses" ...University can't be compared with these tin pot businesses any way there are enough suckers in the world . let them get swindled who cares, be it "Get rich quick Trading schemes" "Binary option fiasco" "Pseudo Prop firms" " Crypto ICO scams" the wild wild west .. CLARIFICATION: yes THERE IS A ROOM FOR THOSE WHO sale courses of highly technical nature regarding finance and trading as long as it is not soled in a snake oil fashion, Ethical = "Learn advance Option trading Technics" Questionable = " Do you want to make great amount of money trading Options? .. come and join me, normally worth $7999 today only for 1999 " or "learn Warren's strategy for $99 a month " blah blah blah
Hello Trader Jo, The business of Earn2Trade is to make money selling educational resources and to make money on the testing fees. This is the business model of Earn2Trade. The business model of the prop firm is to filter through the Gauntlet™ candidates to get the best traders that will grow its business. There is a split between the two companies because the two companies have two different business models. There isn't meant to be any smoke and mirrors behind it, and while I can't speak to others in our industry we don't try to hide anything that wouldn't give us a disadvantage against our competitors. You spoke about a CTA having regulatory obligations, and I can speak to that as well since I run a CTA and am licensed by the NFA. We went through nearly two years of setup and tremendous expenses to get our educational courses and legal structure secured to ensure that everything was acceptable to our legal team. I understand very well my obligations toward the NFA and we bring the same strictness and oversight to our management of Earn2Trade. Regarding the percentage of passing candidates, I can tell you candidly that as of January 23rd, 2019, 21.1% of all candidates who signed up for the Gauntlet™ were funded. You must also take into consideration that some of those candidates took the Gauntlet™ more than once, but that is still an extraordinary number that we are proud of. We never hid this information, and you can find an interview of me here in which I provide that information and more: https://funded-trader.com/2019/01/23/interview-with-earn2trades-founder-ryan-masten/ We are very proud of what we are doing at Earn2Trade and we will continue to grow and provide the best and most competitive experience for our students and Gauntlet™ candidates. While there may be some in the industry who are out to provide an environment where individuals can get "scammed", we are providing a great opportunity for traders while we look for the best talent. I'm not ashamed to make money from that.