Prop Firm Hub | Page 784 | 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

  • #15,661
  • May 13, 2023 1:22pm May 13, 2023 1:22pm
Quoting Vitore
Just looked at TFF pages after a while and, surprise surprise - their cTrader label disappeared and they still not implemented it. And most likely never will. MFF - same story repeats as a couple years back. Promises, promises, for month they keep saying "it will be released when it's properly tested" yet still nothing as usual. Another desperate strategy to bring new traders in who hope they will switch when it goes live? IDK
But ctrader traders only buy a prop account if a firm has c-trader. So what is the purpose of doing this? If someone is capable of doing the task on mt4/5 why would they even need ctrader and why would ctrader even be a factor in someones decision making?

P.S Spotware are very difficult people to deal with, it doesn't surprise me at all that people have cancellations and/or delays.
  • #15,662
  • May 13, 2023 1:47pm May 13, 2023 1:47pm
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} That rule was eliminated. But they have 2 rule that may be challenging: 1. SL in all orders (must be entered max 60 sec after trade initiated) 2. 5% daily DD but only 50% of that (2.5%) in a single instrument Can be tough if you do a lot of trading. You need to pay close attention any time you open new positions.
SL on all orders is fine by me, but only 50% of the daily DD on a single instrument is basically half the drawdown for traders who focus on a single thing - which, by the prop firm data is the vast amount of very profitable traders.
  • #15,663
  • May 13, 2023 2:02pm May 13, 2023 2:02pm
Quoting Takisd
{quote} But ctrader traders only buy a prop account if a firm has c-trader. So what is the purpose of doing this? If someone is capable of doing the task on mt4/5 why would they even need ctrader and why would ctrader even be a factor in someones decision making? P.S Spotware are very difficult people to deal with, it doesn't surprise me at all that people have cancellations and/or delays.
Well if this is true then there are many traders they can get only if they have ctrader. But i think that many are even their traders already waiting for migration whenever available. I am ctrader only trader and still trade multiple mt5 accounts. Never placed a trade via mt only closed in emergency. All is copy service. An there are more such traders waiting for the change and requesting it from them. Because copying ctrader to ctrader is way more reliable and faster then from ctrader to mt.

I dont expect them doing it. I just dont understand why they keep promising it when they are not able to deliver it.

They just posted an announcement on Discord from which it seems as if they just realized (after all those years) how much different the ctrader environment is.
Money is made by sitting, not trading
  • #15,664
  • May 13, 2023 2:18pm May 13, 2023 2:18pm
Quoting LehmanBrotha
What are the current no time limit options? My Funded FX Funded Trading Plus The Funded Trader - Knight Challenge (although the daily loss is 3% vs. 5% for those 2 above) Anyone else?
-Traders With Edge has a 1-year option (for 1-step challenge model). They also have the option to extend the 2-step challenge model to 120-days for phase-1 and 60-days is their default for phase-2.

However, they are overpriced and I guess that they decided to change their policy and not refund the customizable options now, which is a greedy move and a big mistake, in my opinion. Still no response from them regarding that, either.

Their 1-step challenge model is not even refundable and they keep changing things. They have been operating for nearly a year now, if I remember correctly, and they still do not seem to know what they are doing.
  • #15,665
  • May 13, 2023 2:22pm May 13, 2023 2:22pm
Quoting Vitore
{quote} Well if this is true then there are many traders they can get only if they have ctrader. But i think that many are even their traders already waiting for migration whenever available. I am ctrader only trader and still trade multiple mt5 accounts. Never placed a trade via mt only closed in emergency. All is copy service. An there are more such traders waiting for the change and requesting it from them. Because copying ctrader to ctrader is way more reliable and faster then from ctrader to mt. I dont expect them doing it. I just dont understand...
Read the announcement.

Not sure how you came to the conclusion about their realization. They literally said its not there because of the dashboard but they have it. When I messed with c-trader, theres a lot of java programming. Imagine java for a trading application.
  • #15,666
  • May 13, 2023 2:29pm May 13, 2023 2:29pm
Quoting Vitore
I just dont understand why they keep promising it when they are not able to deliver it.
-I can only speculate, but I suspect that it may just not be a priority for them.

Weren't some traders blocked from using Ctrader (e.g. Americans)? I assume that most traders are probably still using metatrader, but I am not really sure.

Probably, any firm that is willing to employ Ctrader will want to be certain that they can have the same control and access that they have with metatrader, as well as ensure that the feeds are the same, with all of the simulated slippage and so forth, as well as dashboard and server integration etc..
  • #15,667
  • May 13, 2023 2:41pm May 13, 2023 2:41pm
Quoting Takisd
{quote} Read the announcement. Not sure how you came to the conclusion about their realization. They literally said its not there because of the dashboard but they have it. When I messed with c-trader, theres a lot of java programming. Imagine java for a trading application.
Its the following sentence:

"There is some internal learning going on as well with C-trader. Its very different as the company who owns it hosts the servers and the controls are very different to our existing bridge."

If they are learning it all only now that sounds to me as if they didnt realize it before. A standard sequence I'd expect is to learn this before the final decision is made and announced. Decide it first, then work on it for months, and then (still) learn the basic difference such as that they will not own the server seems odd
Money is made by sitting, not trading
  • #15,668
  • May 13, 2023 3:11pm May 13, 2023 3:11pm
Quoting Vitore
If they are learning it all only now that sounds to me as if they didnt realize it before. A standard sequence I'd expect is to learn this before the final decision is made and announced. Decide it first, then work on it for months, and then (still) learn the basic difference such as that they will not own the server seems odd
-There are a few things that I remember, assuming that my memory is correct. First, they spent a great deal of time trying to figure out how to get their new dashboard and server to work in the way that they wanted/needed to with metatrader. They were short-staffed for a long time.

They also spent (wasted?) time setting up physical trading desks in a few countries (not sure if they ever finished that or even started on it), and, they have been working on expanding the scope of their business to cater to the liquidity/broker side. I think that Ctrader was not the priority, and now that they have time to actually work on it, it is taking longer to figure out than they anticipated, which is not surprising to me at all.

If they knew that providing Ctrader would expand their client base by a significant margin, then they probably would have given more time and attention to it before now. I do not think that they are trying to mislead people intentionally. I just think that they have probably taken on too much (and grew too much?) at times in order to keep their promises on it. I am pretty sure that they have even stated that Ctrader was not their priority above some other things. If the user statistics are anything close to what I would imagine, then such a decision would probably make a lot of sense to me.
  • #15,669
  • May 13, 2023 3:19pm May 13, 2023 3:19pm
Quoting Vitore
If they are learning it all only now that sounds to me as if they didnt realize it before. A standard sequence I'd expect is to learn this before the final decision is made and announced. Decide it first, then work on it for months, and then (still) learn the basic difference such as that they will not own the server seems odd
-I think, knowing that something is possible and making a decision based on that does not seem overly unreasonable, even if you do not yet fully know how difficult it may be to accomplish. If they made a decision to announce any sort of definitive schedule though (and did not include verbiage like "we hope to" or "we expect to" etc.), then that was probably just a poor choice on their part. But I would not look too much into that.
  • #15,670
  • May 13, 2023 3:46pm May 13, 2023 3:46pm
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-I think, knowing that something is possible and making a decision based on that does not seem overly unreasonable, even if you do not yet fully know how difficult it may be to accomplish. If they made a decision to announce any sort of definitive schedule though (and did not include verbiage like "we hope to" or "we expect to" etc.), then that was probably just a poor choice on their part. But I would not look too much into that.
I agree. With all the (reasonable) arguments against I'm just surprised that they ever promised it (2 years back) and then after realizing back then (for the first time) how difficult that task would be vs the little benefit for them and giving up on it why for goodness sake would they announce and promise it yet again only to work on it for months again and keep postponing it with no result again (to date)

Wouldn't it be easier just not to do it at all? If they have enough of MT traders, this will not bring them much of the benefits, and it is so different, difficult, and otherwise impractical to do, why do it in the first place? That's what I don't get. Maybe that some people just need to feel a constant overload and delay in everything they do. Otherwise I don't know.
Money is made by sitting, not trading
  • #15,671
  • May 13, 2023 4:43pm May 13, 2023 4:43pm
Probably because some people want it and keep asking them for it. Deciding to drop it after the fact wouldn't look great for them, either.
  • #15,672
  • May 13, 2023 4:51pm May 13, 2023 4:51pm
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: _1.png Size: 25 KB
  • #15,673
  • May 13, 2023 5:31pm May 13, 2023 5:31pm
Quoting Boulder
{image}
If this is true they sell 100 challenges 200K for 950$ x 100 = 95.000$
5 of those guys will get a payout. Provided that average payout is not above aprox 19.000 they would be break even, just on fees received + payouts done (forgetting operational costs).

Takisd does these stats seem correct ?
  • #15,674
  • May 13, 2023 9:13pm May 13, 2023 9:13pm
Quoting Capablanca
If this is true they sell 100 challenges 200K for 950$ x 100 = 95.000$ 5 of those guys will get a payout. Provided that average payout is not above aprox 19.000 they would be break even, just on fees received + payouts done (forgetting operational costs).
-It is an interesting thing to think about.

I have to assume that their payout percentage is higher than MFF's because they have a 1-step challenge model, which makes it much easier for people to see a payout. MFF also has an instant funding model, which will allow for better longevity. The 1-step model for MFFX is actually more risk for the firm.

If we use MFF's latest statistics for comparison, we can see that only about 8 out of 100 traders actually make it to funded (2-step challenge). What percentage of those 8 actually receive a payout is unknown (I think?).

Per MFF's statistics, their most popular model was 10k, meanwhile, their least popular model was 200k. With that consideration in mind, the profit margins would probably be better if we assume that MFFX's stats are similar in nature, simply because the draw-down allowance, relative to fee, is so different between those account sizes.
  • #15,675
  • May 14, 2023 12:51am May 14, 2023 12:51am
The funderpro.com. Classic 2 phase evaluation but:

  1. There are no time limits (no rush, no stress)
  2. Trading live funded accounts
  3. Scaling plan

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: screenshot.png Size: 32 KB
  • #15,676
  • May 14, 2023 2:28am May 14, 2023 2:28am
Quoting mcquak
The funderpro.com. Classic 2 phase evaluation but: There are no time limits (no rush, no stress) Trading live funded accounts Scaling plan {image}
Thanks for posting.

Consistency rule, crypto payment only, picture of a race car driver on the landing page, trust pilot poo poo reviews.

A swing and a miss for me.
Pride always comes before destruction.... -Proverbs 16:18
  • #15,677
  • May 14, 2023 6:04am May 14, 2023 6:04am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-It is an interesting thing to think about. I have to assume that their payout percentage is higher than MFF's because they have a 1-step challenge model, which makes it much easier for people to see a payout. MFF also has an instant funding model, which will allow for better longevity. The 1-step model for MFFX is actually more risk for the firm. If we use MFF's latest statistics for comparison, we can see that only about 8 out of 100 traders actually make it to funded (2-step challenge). What percentage of those 8 actually receive a payout...
The good old ponzi works as long as they get a steady flow of new clients. Whether they have to pay out to 4 or 2 clients per 100 clients is insignificant. I read somewhere that with MMF 2% of the clients get to the first payout. It should also be noted that it's much easier to get clients for the unlimited challenges than to the traditional limited ones.
  • #15,678
  • May 14, 2023 7:12am May 14, 2023 7:12am
hello everyone
thinking maybe trying prop firm with small amount to see how it goes.
any recommendations for firm to non us clients except ftmo.
passed their test on demo account in two weeks but i don't like their rules.
thanks in advance
Mickey
Mickey All Time Return: -59.9%
  • #15,679
  • May 14, 2023 7:16am May 14, 2023 7:16am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-It is an interesting thing to think about. I have to assume that their payout percentage is higher than MFF's because they have a 1-step challenge model, which makes it much easier for people to see a payout. MFF also has an instant funding model, which will allow for better longevity. The 1-step model for MFFX is actually more risk for the firm. If we use MFF's latest statistics for comparison, we can see that only about 8 out of 100 traders actually make it to funded (2-step challenge). What percentage of those 8 actually receive a payout...
People are so gullible to these idiots.

MFF has like 1 million customers, MFFX has like 1000.

If 1 trade gets paid at MFFX and 1 gets paid at MFF, MFFX percentage of people paid is immediately higher. If you factor in the loss stats of the market as a whole its the same thing the percentage falls over time as the number of people who lose is always higher.

On another note, I took the step to reach out to Miss Jessica Ghaney about her prop firm magical grift where she has an amazing no risk strategy where you can hedge between your broker and your prop firm account, only $2500 and a pack of twizzlers and its all yours.
  • #15,680
  • May 14, 2023 1:03pm May 14, 2023 1:03pm
Quoting TraderTero
The good old ponzi works as long as they get a steady flow of new clients. Whether they have to pay out to 4 or 2 clients per 100 clients is insignificant.
-In most cases, this is probably true. The problem arises if/when you get a couple of traders that are capable of doing serious damage, especially if you are a new, much smaller firm.
89 traders viewing now