I use IB and another Broker. I could never say I have NEVER had a problem. The only way a trader who trades several times a week or more and states that they "have never had a problem" does not trade. It is just as a joke to state the absolute as to always slander. All Brokers have problems, especially if they are always updating their software. I agree it would be nice to have the good and bad points posted as not only would it help other traders but also the Broker. When I have a problem I check elite trader first as it takes so long to get a person on the phone and it helps to validate my point if I am told they have no problems that they are aware of.
whats stupid is when people give good reviews, they just say: never had a problem. They dont give arguments what they like and don't like, you know things that actually help. and the bad reviews have more arguments. the good reviews are shills.
Simple remedy. Anybody who provides a review should be forced to submit either their name and DOB or city. Ofcourse this shouldn't be made public for anybody to see, but it should be made available for the brokers to check, to see if the reviewer is a genuine account holder. If not, review is deleted. Each review could have a "pending review" alert at the top of the post in order to prevent the distortion of perception by creating numerous profiles and adding false names, numbers and DOB's. That is assuming the brokers actually care about the perception of their companies, and if elitetrader are willing to help clean this up with the view of providing a service that is trustworthy and operates with integrity. Although perhaps brokers feel that security is a greater issue than the potential benefits of vetted reviews. Can something be worked out? Otherwise, reviews are a total sham and a complete waste of webspace that offer no help to anybody whatsoever.
ok, I posted one of the "latest ratings" on IB, and I can tell the OP that it is not a joke. As a retail trader, one very important thing they need is an honest broker (maybe it's an oxymoron ), therefore, it is very helpful if traders help each other out by posting their experiences with those brokers. This is what I call vicarious experience. In other words, a trader doesn't have to experience directly a broker by opening an account, deposting money, finding out its problems, then withdrawing money, and shutting down the account. It's a long process and it costs money if a broker's trading platform is bad, or a broker is simply front-running the customers' orders. so far, IB's execution is instant and it doesn't front run customers' orders. I have nothing to complain about IB. Customer service? Why the hell do you need customer service if your trading platform is running reliably? Oh, You want to chat, ok, open your local phone book and find a number under "escort service" and call that number. ps: I have never used escort service and will not.
Where's IB resident bash the basher, kiwi_trader? Would have sworn he'd be here by now insulting anyone who doesn't give IB 5 star service ratings.
Or hows about IB provide all clients with a "special elitetrader review number" Completely transparent, no names, just the number. Surely IB would recieve a little rebate on advertising costs for plugging ET wink wink.
I completely disagree that reviews should be more atively modrated than they are now. (Reviews consisting of a single swear word and the like are being removed by moderators currently as we don't see any of those.) The spirit of this Web-site is one needs to think for themselves and separate useful posts from pointless. If you want a short, balanced review (as if the reviewer was choosing the broker for you) Barrons magazine is a better source. "Active" moderation, where only the most "useful" are kept and majority is deleted, has a number of serious issues. which would render review system near useless: 1) What makes sense to one person may not make any sense to another. A moderator, who is unfamiliar with a particular platform, may consider a post that points an actual problem useless; 2) There is a large space for favoritism, both towards brokers and reviewers 3) Actual number of posts is an imporant indicator of itself. It shows that a particular broker is used by many and any serious problems are likely spotted in one of the review. 4) Lack of strongly negative posts shows that most revews are likely disguised ads and very few people from the forum mebers ever used the broker in question. I agree that informative reviews that cover more than one aspect are generally more useful for someone who just starts to learn about a particular broker. However, for reason described above removing less informative reviews is not a solution. It will actually dramatiocally decrease teh overall value of the reviews section. A better solution would be a rating system like on amazon.com. Then one would start by reading the most useful positive review and the most useful negative review, then read half a dozen of the most useful reviews, then read the rest of the reviews if they wish to. P.S. Not all complaints about "slippage" are biased or uninformative. Imagine the following hypothetical post: P.P.S. I agree that actual ratings are not very uselful. Reviewers are forced to rate the broker in all of the number of catgories. You will notice that many reviewers are prepared to rate only one or two categories when you see the number of "category" ratings left at the "default" rating or set to the highest or lowest possible rating. Reviews that cover only a specific issue are still useful for anyone who actually takes time to read all reviews of a particular broker.
Bottom line is itâs rigged. Every time you see a few negative comments with in 24 hours there is a swarm of new positive commentsâ¦without fail every single time. Do you think these companies are going to pay top dollar to have there advertisement in a prime spot, and then have negative reviews. Trust me itâs all rigged.