Discussion in 'Forex Brokers' started by drasfs, Jan 21, 2008.
To sum it up. Does the hotspot retail version seem reliable?
Although I have no first-hand way to judge MBT-Steve's veracity, it would probably be useful for everyone reading this (hey, you too, ssss) to know that he's not (only) a salesman. Long-time denizens of ET know that he is one of the founding co-owners of MB Trading:
Thinking strictly as a pragmatist, I'd say it would hardly be in his own business interest to put out demonstrably false information out there.
Further, when it comes to all retail and semi-institutional forex platforms, what the broker-customer agreement has to say about who the "counterparty" to the customer's trade is, has nothing to do with whether that broker:
1) acts as principal or agent; and
2) is an ECN or a marketmaker.
Anyone who believes otherwise is... misinformed. Also read what MrAngry wrote a few posts back.
Although I have no first-hand way to judge MBT-Steve's veracity, it would probably be useful for everyone reading this (hey, you too, ssss) to know that he's not (only) a salesma
Author have had conflict with owner Thinkorswim alsov .
From start author sended all e-mail exchange
to FBI, CFTC and SEC
Problem was simple -Owner Thinkorswim
instructed through e-mail CEO marketzar
(both are native USA ) how contest win prize money of the author must be sended to author account by thinkorswim
Tehy can not send 45 days ,but stated sended ... multiple time's
After all owner Thinkorswim stated to author ! - that he will forbidd for author
access to any USA financial institut .
Only with assistance court of IOWA
problem was decided for author ...
Clear, account by thinkorswim was closed
lol, 'sports-related wagering liquidity providers', sounds very politically correct
'Bookies' pretty much sums it up, and many operate a similar model. I don't know what the percentages are for losing betters compared to losing traders but I imagine they're about the same. Let's say 90% of betters lose, he would be stupid not to keep most bets in-house. The bookie manages his exposure, if too many bets favor a particular horse (or whatever) he'll offset with another bookie, or if Fred always bets big and usually wins big he'll lay off the bet. The broker does the same, just better. He has at his disposal very sophisticated analysis software of his clients trades and uses that to his advantage obviously. Consistent losing traders he fills instantly and leaves them to it, after all they're losing without any intervention or help. Consistently profitable traders he'll monitor more closely and hedge their trades or at least limit his risk. He'll protect himself from scalpers who are picking his pocket by maybe putting them on manual execution, and like a bookie he'll also monitor his overall exposure and hedge it depending on his risk model.
All that sounds fairly reasonable and brokers and traders can and do co-exist quite happily and profitably for years. Everyone makes money, everyone's happy (well except the 90% of course!).
With the wide choice of brokers available it's a dilemma who to choose. Every broker has some degree of bad press so going by what someone else says isn't a reliable way to make a decision. Every trader has a different style and time frame of trading so it's not one size fits all. As well as that a big percentage of losing traders blame their broker, unjustly most of the time.
The only way to make sure your broker choice suits your needs is to try it and see unfortunately. You can obviously narrow down the field by things like where you prefer them to be located, account and trading minimums, platform ease of use, etc, and of course also check the regulatory websites for any enforcement action or warnings, but at the end of the day about the only reliable way to decide is simply try them out in a live trading environment.
Sorry if any of that sounded unintentionally patronising!
I was generalizing, apologies to Steve if my comments were inappropriate or he took them personally.
Counterparty means what it says, they initially take the other side of your trade. Whether they hedge it, keep it in-house, or match it against another trader is a bit academic really.
Not at all!
Observations so far:
GFT: Not crazy about the platform, sales rep called too often.
FXCM: Seems good, but I want to open with less $
Oanda: Clunky charts at first, but it's growing on me.
Tradestation: Still have futures acct, no demo avail. for forex.
Hotspot: I'll look at it.
Spread: Same as the bookies "juice"
Liquidity provider: Laying off the action
Margin call: Vinnie
That advice as superb, for FX markets or any other. You should laminate it and sell it on eBay.
All of us should be attempting to imitate what the "professionals" do, which is to use multiple brokers, executing our strategies as anonymously as possible and giving more business to brokers who give us the best fills, and less to those who give us worse fills.
Is that perhaps what "ssss" was trying to say, in his roundabout Altavista Babelfish fashion?
holy smokes this guy's a hoot to read.
Agree. That paragraph of mine ("Further, when it comes to all retail and semi-institutional forex platforms...") actually wasn't in response to you at all, but others who seem to read a bit too much into standard forex retail broker agreement language like "counterparty" identification. Were they expecting that Citi, UBS, Goldman or Barclays would be the counterparty to their 5-lot trades on an ECN?
Separate names with a comma.