Prop Firm Hub | Page 1314 | 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

  • #26,261
  • Nov 15, 2023 9:36am Nov 15, 2023 9:36am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Except if you reside in the US, then you are forced to "take it"...it's all part of the regulators protecting us.
in this point i am uneducated , i dont know about the special USA laws. you are right, this can maybe change some of my points.

so you cant use some broker like interactive brokers or other bigger ?
  • #26,262
  • Nov 15, 2023 9:43am Nov 15, 2023 9:43am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Yes, I have always stated....the profitable trader is the prop firms WORST customer. However, folks have also been banned from market maker brokers when they become too profitable as well. In a B-Book broker ( I know they can mitigate through hedging, etc.) they are the counterparty as well....you win, they lose and vice versa....same reason the brokers freeze platforms so you cannot exit, random price spikes (not news or rollover). Ironically, it is the "regulated" shitholes in the US that are most guilty of these practices. That is why...
I just verified this with the rejection of my 500K funded account for « taking too much risk » on ONE trade, translate earning too much… Made like $102K in one day thanks to the traction of CPI release yesterday and they make in their pants…
Attached Image(s) (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: IMG_4312.png Size: 146 KB
Click to Enlarge Name: IMG_4313.png Size: 111 KB
I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure...
  • #26,263
  • Nov 15, 2023 9:49am Nov 15, 2023 9:49am
Quoting Filipo1
{quote} I just verified this with the rejection of my 500K funded account for « taking too much risk » on ONE trade, translate earning too much… Made like $102K in one day thanks to the traction of CPI release yesterday and they make in their pants… {image} {image}
Yes....gamble all you want in the challenge.....but earn profit, we don't want you. Amazing.....this is the shit that needs to be "regulated" out of existence.
  • #26,264
  • Nov 15, 2023 9:50am Nov 15, 2023 9:50am
Quoting Filipo1
{quote} I just verified this with the rejection of my 500K funded account for « taking too much risk » on ONE trade, translate earning too much… Made like $102K in one day thanks to the traction of CPI release yesterday and they make in their pants… {image} {image}
what is funny, that they call it funded account. because they dont fund the account, its just pure nothing there, just a number on the screen with zero money behind. and the differences between numbers get later paid, but no funding at all.
  • #26,265
  • Nov 15, 2023 9:51am Nov 15, 2023 9:51am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Agree.....there is absolutely no way the brokers will have to adhere to no indices,no hedging, FIFO, but the prop firms are immune. That would defeat the entire purpose of the brokers paying off (I mean lobbying) the CFTC to go after MFF.
Why prop firm will be immune? Doesn't RFED requirement force them to offer the same?
  • #26,266
  • Nov 15, 2023 9:52am Nov 15, 2023 9:52am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Yes....gamble all you want in the challenge.....but earn profit, we don't want you. Amazing.....this is the shit that needs to be "regulated" out of existence.
they cant regulate. when someone trade like this you would always win big with prop when you open many props in news trades in different direction , because you just win big and risk is taken by prop company (because you lose only small your fee). this will make prop bankrupt in months.

same like with all strategies where you bring risk out of yourself to the company (like all martingale strategies) and same time take out the wins until will bust on end.
  • #26,267
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:01am Nov 15, 2023 10:01am
Quoting solarpower
{quote} Why prop firm will be immune? Doesn't RFED requirement force them to offer the same?
yes, that is what I am saying ....no way props are immune.
  • #26,268
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:08am Nov 15, 2023 10:08am
Quoting pipmaster77
I believe some of the moves FTMO has recently made, including aquiring a traditional prop, were to set themselves up to be able to continue in the US......but what the hell do I know?
-Or an attempt to try to legitimize their business and hide from the ponzi police.
  • #26,269
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:21am Nov 15, 2023 10:21am
Quoting pipmaster77
Amazing.....this is the shit that needs to be "regulated" out of existence.
-I would expect regulation to kill the model. But as you know, our country has made me very cynical.

Perhaps an alternative model could exist, that involves recurring fees, cap on accounts/funding and a cap on monthly profit. Once you reach your profit cap for the month, your accounts become untradable.

The obvious downside is that traders would not have the 'opportunity' to blow their accounts once they reach their limit, potentially resulting in more obligatory payouts. The obvious upside is that the recurring fees may easily-offset operational costs, and that most traders would likely not reach their monthly limit anyway.

If the monthly limit was set to something reasonable, such as 30k per trader, then it might be viable.

If we look at the profit that MFF was actually doing, now that we know, it does not seem unreasonable to think that there is much room for some creativity in this space.
  • #26,270
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:30am Nov 15, 2023 10:30am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-I would expect regulation to kill the model. But as you know, our country has made me very cynical. Perhaps an alternative model could exist, that involves recurring fees, cap on accounts/funding and a cap on monthly profit. Once you reach your profit cap for the month, your accounts become untradable. The obvious downside is that traders would not have the 'opportunity' to blow their accounts once they reach their limit, potentially resulting in more obligatory payouts. The obvious upside is that the recurring fees may easily-offset operational...
I hope something beneficial comes of it. Key word being "beneficial". Either way, I'll make money....whether it be FTMO and fx props, APEX for futures or just continue trading my AMP account. The AMP account will always be safe as the CFTC loves the futures market.
  • #26,271
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:36am Nov 15, 2023 10:36am
Quoting pipmaster77
Either way, I'll make money....
-This is the right mindset.
  • #26,272
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:37am Nov 15, 2023 10:37am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} I hope something beneficial comes of it. Key word being "beneficial". Either way, I'll make money....whether it be FTMO and fx props, APEX for futures or just continue trading my AMP account. The AMP account will always be safe as the CFTC loves the futures market.
We should never underestimate regulators and lawmakers.

Recently I'm noticing a trend of several articles (very convenient supported by studies from Goldman Sachs and so) saying that markets became more volatile because retail is trading 0DTE options (options that expire end of day). They say people are using it as a gambling device. Let's see if they are not paving the road to forbid that for non professionals.

One day they wake up and find out that futures, with such low day trading margins of AMP, is some kind of a casino and shut that down for retail. I always expect the worse from these people.
  • #26,273
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:38am Nov 15, 2023 10:38am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-I would expect regulation to kill the model. But as you know, our country has made me very cynical. Perhaps an alternative model could exist, that involves recurring fees, cap on accounts/funding and a cap on monthly profit. Once you reach your profit cap for the month, your accounts become untradable. The obvious downside is that traders would not have the 'opportunity' to blow their accounts once they reach their limit, potentially resulting in more obligatory payouts. The obvious upside is that the recurring fees may easily-offset operational...
Nailed it. More or less what they did in Germany in more extreme ways as I understand to trading in general. Capping it. So this would for sure be end goal regardless im guessing for regulators. Put cap to profit levels with prop firms . Fits the global direction too, perfectly.
  • #26,274
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:43am Nov 15, 2023 10:43am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} We should never underestimate regulators and lawmakers. Recently I'm noticing a trend of several articles (very convenient supported by studies from Goldman Sachs and so) saying that markets became more volatile because retail is trading 0DTE options (options that expire end of day). They say people are using it as a gambling device. Let's see if they are not paving the road to forbid that for non professionals. One day they wake up and find out that futures, with such low day trading margins of AMP, is some kind of a casino and shut that...
Difference being their hands are in the cookie jar with futures. They are either paid off, getting kickbacks, etc, etc. They don't care if you lose your life savings in futures. It's all one big crock of shit when you take a step back, look at it from the outside and apply just a pinch of common sense. Regulation keeps the rich...rich. It is disguised as protecting the little guy. Money looks out for money....plain and simple.
  • #26,275
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:48am Nov 15, 2023 10:48am
Quoting labu
{quote} Nailed it. Fits the global direction too, perfectly.
Sure does. One world order. Too many heads buried in the sand to do anything about it......Just put your mask on, lock yourself in your house and shut up. They have already tested what they can get away with.
  • #26,276
  • Nov 15, 2023 10:48am Nov 15, 2023 10:48am
Quoting labu
Capping it. So this would for sure be end goal regardless im guessing for regulators.
-I was speaking in terms of model viability so that props do not need to do nefarious things in order to try to ban profitable traders.

If there was a monthly profit cap (with monthly, recurring fees), then the sustainability of the model might be significant. Firms would need to test out which numbers work best.
  • #26,277
  • Nov 15, 2023 11:01am Nov 15, 2023 11:01am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-I was speaking in terms of model viability so that props do not need to do nefarious things in order to try to ban profitable traders. If there was a monthly profit cap (with monthly, recurring fees), then the sustainability of the model might be significant. Firms would need to test out which numbers work best.
they will not change , why they should? in trading games they design the rules, its not regulated in any kind and never will because its just a game and the player accept the gaming rules.
when some have even in their Terms and condition that with any bad review they read from you your account gets deleted and all wins blocked, then you know what happens with this company. FTMO is famous for this and the reason why not 100k bad reviews exist.
  • #26,278
  • Nov 15, 2023 11:11am Nov 15, 2023 11:11am
Interestingly when I blew up my APEX account I got an email stating that and giving me my options going forward.

When I blew up my Topstep account I got no email, no notification on the website, nothing. Maybe their strategy is to hope you forget to cancel your subscription at the end of the month. Also strange is the dashboard doesn't show the updated balance but the Tradovate platform does. Hmmmmm

PS. Does anyone know if you have to close your trades on APEX for the daily reset? I can't find that anywhere in their rules.
Pride always comes before destruction.... -Proverbs 16:18
  • #26,279
  • Nov 15, 2023 11:37am Nov 15, 2023 11:37am
Quoting Trader191
they will not change , why they should?
-Because, eventually, word will keep getting out about so-and-so firms denying payment and/or banning profitable traders etc. until there are no reputable firms left and the entire space becomes a ghost town.

If changing the model ensures long-term sustainability without having to play the whack-a-mole game, then that is a win-win situation; props can feel secure about their business while traders can feel secure about their trading.

As things currently are, most firms seem to have an unwritten watermark or profit threshold that they do not publicly disclose. This results in traders wasting their time (and sometimes, money), and causes what could-be-credible firms to do nefarious things in order to remain in business.

If the model was changed in a way that has been discussed, then it could potentially eliminate these issues by creating a more transparent prop-trader relationship while ensuring long-term sustainability for the remote prop model.
  • #26,280
  • Nov 15, 2023 11:38am Nov 15, 2023 11:38am
Quoting Expo33
Interestingly when I blew up my APEX account I got an email stating that and giving me my options going forward. When I blew up my Topstep account I got no email, no notification on the website, nothing. Maybe their strategy is to hope you forget to cancel your subscription at the end of the month. Also strange is the dashboard doesn't show the updated balance but the Tradovate platform does. Hmmmmm PS. Does anyone know if you have to close your trades on APEX for the daily reset? I can't find that anywhere...
They will attempt to auto close, but they say it's on you to ultimately do so. Either way, cannot hold.
83 traders viewing now