Prop Firm Hub | Page 454 | Crypto Craft

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Anyone trading with a Prop firm 31 replies

So I accepted a Prop Trading job in South Beach Miami 44 replies

prop firm new model - my trading journey 871 replies

Attachments: Prop Firm Hub
Exit Attachments

Prop Firm Hub

  • #9,061
  • Jul 5, 2022 9:38am Jul 5, 2022 9:38am
Quoting Takisd
{quote} In the US where any dumpster lawyer takes a case, the idea is to send a list of demands and spook a firm. I dont think you can win in any way against FTMO or MFF as I suspect they have proper legal structures in the background. But the companies run by younger folk who are scared of lawyers it could work. Remember, funding talent got rekt because they had server issues, people taking advantage of their stupid server and a pile of legal cases occurring at the same time.
Yes, it is just the "light going on" with the regulators that concerns me. I do not believe this space is large enough (yet) for anyone to pay attention. However, once the regulators realize it exists, look out.....especially here in the US. The most extreme example of the overreach of US regulations is the fact that everyone in the world can trade the US INDICES ON SPOT EXCEPT THOSE OF US IN THE US!!!!! I'm going to stop here, if I get started on this pathetic government and regulatory bodies we have in this country, I'll be pissed off the rest of the week.
  • #9,062
  • Jul 5, 2022 9:43am Jul 5, 2022 9:43am
Quoting Takisd
Ok, finotive's rules are a bit much when the targets are fairly high. Mostly the stop loss calculation being no more than 50% of the daily allowed dd is the problem, especially if you are trying to scale into a winner. If the target was like 3% i think its fair but with those rules and the current target its fairly difficult. Having a stop loss on every trade is do-able but having that stoploss calculation for every trade being a certain amount really reduces size, so you have to scale into each position and then calculate that a) you haven't got...
I wonder how they interpret the rule of the 50% DD in a single trade.
If you scale up on the same instrument I guess it's considered the same trade, right ?
I mean, risking 3% in a 10 lot trade goes beyond the 50% of 5% daily DD allowed.
What about 5 x 2 lots ? I guess is considered the same, right ?
  • #9,063
  • Jul 5, 2022 9:46am Jul 5, 2022 9:46am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Yes, it is just the "light going on" with the regulators that concerns me. I do not believe this space is large enough (yet) for anyone to pay attention. However, once the regulators realize it exists, look out.....especially here in the US. The most extreme example of the overreach of US regulations is the fact that everyone in the world can trade the US INDICES ON SPOT EXCEPT THOSE OF US IN THE US!!!!! I'm going to stop here, if I get started on this pathetic government and regulatory bodies we have in this country, I'll be pissed off...
Well, genius european legislators prevented their European citizens from buying ETFs like SPY or TLT, those hiper-super-increadible-dangerous instruments.
  • #9,064
  • Jul 5, 2022 10:08am Jul 5, 2022 10:08am
Actually to be honest I am not afraid at all from regulators, because then the prop firms would choose a country, where there is no such regulation. What matters are just the payouts from them. As long as the business models work for the props and there is a lot of demand, they will offer such challenges. So nothing to be worried...
  • #9,065
  • Jul 5, 2022 10:15am Jul 5, 2022 10:15am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} I wonder how they interpret the rule of the 50% DD in a single trade. If you scale up on the same instrument I guess it's considered the same trade, right ? I mean, risking 3% in a 10 lot trade goes beyond the 50% of 5% daily DD allowed. What about 5 x 2 lots ? I guess is considered the same, right ?

TBH rules like this just stink of interpretation and fine print catch alls. I'm just avoiding it as much as possible. Its hard to safely pass with those rules in place to be honest. All being said, if you had no choice but to STP live accounts these rules make it reasonable to do so but not very profitable as an entity.
  • #9,066
  • Jul 5, 2022 10:40am Jul 5, 2022 10:40am
Quoting TrAndy1
Actually to be honest I am not afraid at all from regulators, because then the prop firms would choose a country, where there is no such regulation. What matters are just the payouts from them. As long as the business models work for the props and there is a lot of demand, they will offer such challenges. So nothing to be worried...
True. However, then they go after the payment processors. Here in the US, when they passed Dodd-Frank in 2010, simple solution was to go offshore. Then slowly but surely, credit cards would no longer deal with them, then netteller, skrill, paypal, and the list just grows. Everything is crypto now, which is no biggie NOW, I simply use stable coins. Once they regulate the hell out of crypto, then we will have an issue. In the US, it is so obvious what the intention is....forex is regulated by the NFA, National Futures Association....they simply want to eliminate spot so everyone goes back to futures, it's all power and control(as is everything in the US) under the guise of "protecting the trader".
Yet, folks can go put their life savings on black in Vegas or spend their entire paycheck week after week on lottery tickets.......no need to protect those folks because the government has their filthy hands in those industries.
I knew if I got started I'd be smashing monitors today.
  • #9,067
  • Jul 5, 2022 10:40am Jul 5, 2022 10:40am
Quoting Takisd
{quote} TBH rules like this just stink of interpretation and fine print catch alls. I'm just avoiding it as much as possible. Its hard to safely pass with those rules in place to be honest. All being said, if you had no choice but to STP live accounts these rules make it reasonable to do so but not very profitable as an entity.
Depends very much on the trading style. i would say that in most of my days and trades this will not have any implications. It's annoying, thus, because one can make a mistake without noticing (I remember the 2 lost funded account in TPT because of the lot limitation, which I overtake simply by mistake in both cases).
Regarding the stops I checked with them that 5m after the trade is initiated is OK to enter the stop. It doesn't have to be entered initially.

Anyway it's stupid rules.
You can't have more than 3 open positions in each instrument in Finotive. So you can't have 1+1+1+1 lots but you can have one trade of 50 lots.
In TPT we could not have 6 lots in EURUSD but could have 5 lots in 10 pairs.
This rules are made by idiots.
  • #9,068
  • Jul 5, 2022 10:49am Jul 5, 2022 10:49am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Depends very much on the trading style. i would say that in most of my days and trades this will not have any implications. It's annoying, thus, because one can make a mistake without noticing (I remember the 2 lost funded account in TPT because of the lot limitation, which I overtake simply by mistake in both cases). Regarding the stops I checked with them that 5m after the trade is initiated is OK to enter the stop. It doesn't have to be entered initially. Anyway it's stupid rules. You can't have more than 3 open positions in each instrument...
So, here is my opinion, for what it is worth.......FTMO, MFF, even TFF (now) and TFT....all clear and concise....here is your target, here is your max loss, here is your duration.......get there however you wish. Therefore, there can only be one reason for these obnoxious rules with the others......FOR YOU TO SLIP UP AND VIOLATE. If they were necessary in this prop business model, for whatever reason, why don't the big boys need them?
  • #9,069
  • Jul 5, 2022 10:55am Jul 5, 2022 10:55am
Why you need a closer look on trading conditions like spreads+commissions when choosing a prop firm, and not on score alone ?
Because the volume you trade matters a lot, when there is a difference in spreads+comms. On MFF 200k challenge its score is 6.55 and 200k FTMO it is 3.14, in absolute terms, it is about $2350. So when you trade an (or some) instruments where the (average) spread difference between two prop firms (here MFF and FTMO as an example) is 1 pip away with commissions included. Then trading more than 235 lots per month would make the prop firm with the lower score favorable. So everyone needs to get a closer look what he is trading and how much, and then calculate the difference in Dollar terms. This difference can be directly calculated from the ranking table and its scores. You only need to multiply the payout percentage with the max DD and divide it by the score. You need do that for every prop firm you are considering. Then you calculate the difference on spreads+comms on your trading volume. That difference should not be eaten up by the spread and commissions, when you choose the prop firm with the higher score. The more you trade the more take into account the trading conditions and therefore scores must be compared correctly.
  • #9,070
  • Edited 11:32am Jul 5, 2022 10:57am | Edited 11:32am
Quoting HengkiTjen
{quote} so you do first pay out ? how was it ?
Yes.

TFF sent the money to my Deel account within 24 hours.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: tff.jpg Size: 104 KB

I try to stay humble but I think it's time to open up an Instagram account and show a pic of me with my new Lambo. Sexy and yet still humble
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: lambo.jpg Size: 205 KB
Pride always comes before destruction.... -Proverbs 16:18
  • #9,071
  • Jul 5, 2022 11:00am Jul 5, 2022 11:00am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} True. However, then they go after the payment processors. Here in the US, when they passed Dodd-Frank in 2010, simple solution was to go offshore. Then slowly but surely, credit cards would no longer deal with them, then netteller, skrill, paypal, and the list just grows. Everything is crypto now, which is no biggie NOW, I simply use stable coins. Once they regulate the hell out of crypto, then we will have an issue. In the US, it is so obvious what the intention is....forex is regulated by the NFA, National Futures Association....they simply...
It is not going to be easy to regulate prop firms as they are private entities and ROI is not much as compared to regulated forex brokers.
Forex brokers needs to prove they are associated with CFTC or NFA etc to get legitimacy where as here its not required at all.
One can argue that same thing was true for binary options but they were outright scams and can be characterized as gamble where as it is hard to prove case here.
Also they can move their company to safe havens if required.
  • #9,072
  • Jul 5, 2022 11:56am Jul 5, 2022 11:56am
It seems most are missing the trading conditions like spreads+commissions when comparing prop firms based on their score. Of course I would assume most of prop traders are not on this thread and never heard about the score to compare prop firm offers versus own compounding on personal live accounts. The May figure of The Funded Trader Program gives me questions about that. Because they traded based on their stats 1.404 million lots on about 2300 funded accounts. If that is correctly measured that would mean the average trader was trading above 600 lots in May. Even it is based on all acounts, say 10000 then it is still 140 lots per account on one month. And this does not mean all accounts are 200k accounts there. That would mean many could be missing the better prop firm based on score and volume traded.
  • #9,073
  • Jul 5, 2022 12:04pm Jul 5, 2022 12:04pm
Quoting TrAndy1
It seems most are missing the trading conditions like spreads+commissions when comparing prop firms based on their score. Of course I would assume most of prop traders are not on this thread and never heard about the score to compare prop firm offers versus own compounding on personal live accounts. The May figure of The Funded Trader Program gives me questions about that. Because they traded based on their stats 1.404 million lots on about 2300 funded accounts. If that is correctly measured that would mean the average trader was trading above 600...

I believe scoring spread would be only beneficial if we assume the trader is profitable. Then the score increases significantly. I do not think that spread (unless significantly wider) affects the pass rate of these firms.

Also, for example, TFT phase 2 and funded the spread is wider than phase 1.

At the moment I am trading at FTMO, MFF, TFT (sorta I kinda stopped) and finotive.

The first two have significantly better conditions on the products I trade but between each other the difference isn't much to consider. The strange part is though that my profit when/if it occurs from copying the same trade between the first 3, is generally the same +/- a few dollars when the trades close.
  • #9,074
  • Edited 12:28pm Jul 5, 2022 12:14pm | Edited 12:28pm
Quoting Takisd
{quote} I believe scoring spread would be only beneficial if we assume the trader is profitable. Then the score increases significantly. I do not think that spread (unless significantly wider) affects the pass rate of these firms. Also, for example, TFT phase 2 and funded the spread is wider than phase 1. At the moment I am trading at FTMO, MFF, TFT (sorta I kinda stopped) and finotive. The first two have significantly better conditions on the products I trade but between each other the difference isn't much to consider. The strange part is though...
It does not affect the pass rate, can be right. But it does affect the overall score because trading volume does matter a lot when there are differences in trading conditions and a certain volume is done. That is independent from the profitability of the trader. The score calculates the value versus own compounding. The differences in spreads+commissions directly affect the value what you get from the prop firm. So if you pay $2750 after passing for a $18k DD on prop firm and $3600 for another prop firm comparable. The difference in absolute term is $850. So if one is trading XXX lots on certain instruments where there is a difference in spreads+comms then one needs to be careful in calculating which prop firm is more favorable in the end. That is all independent, whether one is profitable, because you are always trading.
  • #9,075
  • Edited 1:30pm Jul 5, 2022 1:14pm | Edited 1:30pm
Quoting Capablanca
There were doubts about this but it seems that Blue Guardian Capital clarified in the FAQs that the minimum 4% is just for the first payout. This is in their FAQs now.
-Yes. I actually contacted support and got clarification on this. I posted their response a few pages back (I think). It is good (and surprising) that they updated their site.

Quoting Takisd
So something alarming came up in a telegram group I stalk. Some guys are planning to collectively sue some firms because they got stung with copy trading rules.
-Giving this some thought, if we try to examine this objectively:

 

  1. It is hard enough to find a lawyer that is willing to take on an case like this (losing case), let alone a lawyer that is able (international law, financial sector etc.), and they will need to find someone that is both. Considering the nature, circumstances and scope of a case like this, the caliber of lawyer needed would likely be high (and very expensive), making things all the more difficult for them, likely even to the point that it would not even be worth it to pursue.
    -
  2. Most cases like this result in settlement (otherwise, what is their goal here?), and if not, cases that go to trial can take years. And cases involving international law? Who knows...
    -
  3. Most lawsuits of this nature do not lead to regulatory changes (which is the bigger concern). And even if that was their goal, suing the firm would not be the correct way to go about it.
    -
  4. Jurisdiction matters, making this all the more difficult, not only from a legal perspective, but also from a practical one. Laws may vary from country-to-country, finding specialized lawyers can be difficult, and not all countries have reciprocity agreements in place that could give any meaningful jurisdictional reach to their claims.
    -
  5. As already pointed out, any firms facing regulatory pressure can always relocate to a more operational-friendly environment.
    -
  6. The bigger firms like MFF and FTMO have their own lawyers and have ensured that they are operating within the legal requirements of their host countries, while also ensuring that they are not subject to the same rules and the regulatory requirements that we would need to be concerned about anyway. Most of these firms are not even structured in a way that would give jurisdictional reach to some of the regulatory groups that could make any problems for the space.
    -
  7. Even if new regulation was their goal, that is very difficult to achieve and can take many years, especially in cases where you are dealing with foreign entities, where legislation may be lacking (or non-existent), due to the nature of these businesses and how (and where) they are structured.
    -
  8. Even if regulation was possible, it would likely only happen in their (crybaby traders) host country/countries and would not apply to everyone, and certainly would not force these firms out of business. Worse-case scenario, which is highly unlikely, these firms would just start black-listing certain countries, similar to how some brokers are doing already. However, due to the nature of how these firms operate, the limited overhead requirements and ease of operations involved etc., it would seem more likely that they would just relocate so that they would not have to drop a potentially large portion of their client-base. Even if blacklisting certain countries was the decision, there are usually ways to circumvent those barriers.


People can sue for just about anything. It does not mean that they would actually win or that they have any case. More importantly, we have to consider whether or not regulation can even be imposed on these firms due to how and where they operate. I suspect that nothing meaningful will come from this. Not only are terms clearly stated (typically in FAQ and a literal, terms and agreement), but also through a signed contract that essentially gives these firms the right to refuse/reject any trader for any reason that they want.

So, the real issue is whether or not this will bring unwanted attention to the space in any meaningful capacity. Personally, I do not think so. Not only because achieving that would likely be very difficult, costly and time-consuming, but also because the policies are clear, legal and do not even fall within the jurisdictional or legal scope of most regulatory groups that would even matter in the first place. This is also such a very small and insignificant matter that only affects a very small group of people, making this all the more likely that nothing significant will ever come from their threats.

This is all just my uneducated opinion. But even if something meaningful came from this, we likely have years of playtime left, which is plenty. And, even after that, there will always be options. I think that the cat is already out of the bag; there is too much profitability (and demand) for this and these firms (and traders) will figure out ways to keep it going in one way, shape or another.

At the end of the day, prop firms are not illegal. Trading is not illegal. There are rules and requirements (licenses and fees etc.) that must be considered in some cases, which is why many Americans are not able to trade with many brokers because of the hassle and/or requirements involved, but that does not mean that we do not have options. The profitability and demand is sufficient enough for some brokers to set up shop in locations that allow for it, and the same would be true for prop firms.

  • #9,076
  • Jul 5, 2022 2:08pm Jul 5, 2022 2:08pm
Quoting symmtrytradr
{quote} Funded Trading Plus is a tricky one, my thoughts: Negatives: 1. Trailing drawdown
It is my understanding that "trailing" stops when DD reaches the starting balance.
  • #9,077
  • Edited 3:18pm Jul 5, 2022 2:44pm | Edited 3:18pm
In one way it is very good that most traders or wannabees just do not know this thread. If the crowd of challenge takers becomes more and more intelligent with higher passing rates, then the fees from the prop firms must go up a lot. Then the advantage of getting more capital would be much lower thus we could not profit that much. The main income of a prop firm is the stupidity and cluelessness of most ones, that have not done their homework of having a good strategy that can pass a challenge. And everyone who knows the score of a prop firm and its meaning and can calculate or estimate his advantage too, has much better odds to catch some profits.
Thinking on these bunch of starters during the last two years, watching an hour per day just youtube, which is full of false promises and fakes like hopping on TV Channels and then see an ad, that they, everyone who wants, can get a large capital for just a small fee. They might think: 'Wow, in no time I get rich from the props.'.
  • #9,078
  • Jul 5, 2022 3:05pm Jul 5, 2022 3:05pm
Quoting ForexGalVA
{quote} It is my understanding that "trailing" stops when DD reaches the starting balance.
Right. But at that time you will be trading your own profits but not receiving 100% payout.
And it's tricky because if they give you a 3.000 initial drawdown and you make 1.000, then you can only lose 2.000 below the starting point. This is horrible.
  • #9,079
  • Jul 5, 2022 3:18pm Jul 5, 2022 3:18pm
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Right. But at that time you will be trading your own profits but not receiving 100% payout. And it's tricky because if they give you a 3.000 initial drawdown and you make 1.000, then you can only lose 2.000 below the starting point. This is horrible.

True, but it depends on reward:risk ratio on your trades and if the biggest challenge is the daily drawdown or max dd. I think most traders hit the daily dd but I could be wrong.

If you take minimum 3:1 reward:risk ratio trades, your risking 333 to get 1,000. So you would have to lose 9 days in a row to hit the max dd, because trail is based on end of day profit. Still not as good as most firms with a fixed max dd based on starting balanced, but for some traders, they can make it work, especially with a goal of scaling to 2.5M. But I agree they lose points for the trailing dd.

Also, yes your trading your own profits at that point (when trail stops), but by reaching 10% profit you will be able to double account size through scaling up to 2.5M (assuming it's true, it takes 4 steps if you start with 200k account). Just like every prop firm, your risk is the fee you put in to take the challenge.
Plan your trade, trade your plan
  • #9,080
  • Jul 5, 2022 3:35pm Jul 5, 2022 3:35pm
Once a prop firm is established in the market and has certain amount of business the real challenge for them starts. Especially when their offer is not so good to other competitors and they are overall overpriced over their fair value, as we can analyze them in details. If then numbers of challenge takers gets less and less, the prop its grown fix costs are eating up in their pockets. Growing is easier to manage then decreasing its size for any prop, I would say. If sum of fees starts to vanish they can tumble quite early, or what would you say ? Knowing the score, trading conditions, all hidden rules, etc. and compare them all makes them transparent to choose from.
81 traders viewing now