The foreign currency market is the largest of all of the trading markets with an almost unbelievable 5 trillion dollars changing hands each day. Until recently Forex trading was consigned to heavy weight traders and brokers who could afford the high minimum trading amounts required. However, the recent appeal of trading online has prompted a further development in the foreign exchange boom. Increased leverages are now not just available for the big scale traders but also for the starter and lower volume speculators. Whereas minimum deposits were at one time in the thousands of dollars range now they are in the hundreds. Nowadays, a trader can enter the foreign exchange with little more than a credit card, a Forex trading account and a laptop or PC. The boom has led to a number of brokers entering the market to meet the demand in online trading, but getting a suitable broker out of so many options can be difficult. Deciding on a Forex broker Take a look at this list of fundamentals to think about when making your selection of a suitable Forex broker: Foreign currencies All Forex brokers provide the "majors" as pairs to trade upon. These principal moneys include the US dollar (USD), the Japanese Yen (JPY) and the British pound (GBP). Further brokerages host platforms that have the alternative to exchange lesser known moneys. The more sluggish Forex currencies or"exotics" encounter even more volatility as opposed to the "majors" which can provide intriguing trading options. If you are planning on trading on one of the weaker, "exotic" currencies make sure that it on the list of currencies to invest with on your broker of choice's platform. In short make sure that you work with currencies that you have an interest in. Trades A lot of currency brokerages have reduced their minimum deposits to as low as $100. Higher leverage sums which were formerly only made accessible for expert traders are currently on hand for the lower end traders. The good thing about this is that with a 50:1 leverage, on a trading account of $1,000 the user can now sustain a place of $50,000. Be careful to remember, however, that leverage is a sort of financial loan, whilst the strength of your account is markedly increased the potential sum to be lost is also boosted. Regulation Each one of the leading Forex firms will have made sure that they are listed by one or more of the main regulatory authorities. For a user to observe that a company is fully regulated shows that the brokerage service is a serious operation devoted to fair market procedures. Signing up for membership with an unregulated broker is not advised, even more so with such a wide choice of regulated brokers out there.. Minimum amounts for deposit Every broker will designate a minimum deposit amount prior to the start of trading. Smaller deposit amounts can be put down using beginner or low volume trading accounts whereas the high roller accounts require higher minimums to begin. As there are such larger numbers of brokers operating the initial deposit amounts can play a significant role as each company pushes for your custom by trying to out compete rival companies with more tempting welcome offers. You will notice that it can be to your gain if you browse a little. Commissions and Spreads Forex brokerages profit though commissions and spreads. The broker's commission can either be set on a per transaction basis or over a set of transactions. The spread refers to the amount between the actual and the bidding prices of a currency or currency pair. Usually the spread is comes in at around 3-5 pips. Margins It is not unconventional for a broker to require that you fund your account with an advanced amount of capital to counter balance any potential losses that may be experienced. This advanced amount is known as a margin or margin requirement. Be sure that the conditions of the margin requirement are suited to your degree of trading. Trading Platforms The most widespread platform in the online Forex market is the Meta trading platform. It is very reliable and can be accessed both on your computer and your mobile device. Some brokers use their own proprietary trading platform as well so it is advisable to take the time to find out how trusted it is and whether there are any interruptions between messaging between their platform and the actual foreign exchange. Support See if you can get as much information as possible about the level of support available with a broker. Good indicators of a broker's level of service can include the trading education materials they have and if there is a live chat option. Together with this, many top companies display documentation, tutorials and eBooks to educate you on how to improve your chances of achieving profitable returns and cutting down minimising the risks. Forex trading involves risks. You can minimise the risks by researching your broker and testing out your trading strategy thoroughly.
A Forex trader's success is often directly related to the Forex broker he/she chooses to conduct business with. If a trader chooses a broker who is unwise, unethical, and/or a combination of both, the trader could lose a substantial amount of money in the Forex market. It can be very difficult to determine which Forex brokers are reputable until a trader has traded real money with them. However, by this time the trader may have lost the money that he/she has invested. Forex Brokers Reviews Fortunately, there are online sites that provide informative Forex broker reviews to aid you in choosing the right firm for your trading needs. These sites have extensively tested the brokers' Forex platforms and trading conditions using real-money accounts and making real trades. This means that you don't have to invest your own money to determine whether a Forex broker is reputable and effective at handling your trades on the market. Some of the criteria that such sites use in their reviews include the safety of a trader's deposits and the honesty of the broker. The trader can conduct his/her own online research about a specific trader via online forums, ask direct questions to the firm, and seek information from the proper authorities. One of the essential things the trader must learn about the broker is whether the firm is regulated by government authorities. Another is whether the firm uses state-of-the-art measures to ensure that the trader's personal information and account details will remain safe from unauthorized access. Sites that provide Forex broker reviews can quickly give you this vital information. forex broker review A trader should also determine the spreads and commissions that the broker will receive when executing trades on the Forex market. The lower the level of commission the better it is for you. Any commissions over 3-pips in EURUSD trades should necessitate you finding another broker. There are quality firms that only charge 1-pip for EURUSD trades. It's important for you to find out the spreads and commissions that are charged by the brokers before deciding to employ them for your Forex trades. These are usually explained on the firm's website. A trader should look for a broker that only requires a small initial deposit. At the same time, however, the trader should also consider leverage and minimum lot size as well. The trader should also choose a firm that provides many ways to fund his/her deposit, including wire transfers, credit cards, and PayPal transfers. Sites that provide Forex broker reviews will usually list the ways in which you can fund your accounts. Top Rated Forex Brokers The trader should also find the right Forex trading platform to execute his/her trades. The platform should provide a comfortable and familiar interface to the trader and should also provide plenty of customizations options. The best way to find the right platform for you is to take it for a spin via a demo account, which most reputable brokerage firms now offer. Visit Here -Most Trusted forex brokers
10 Secrets The Trading Industry Doesn’t Want You To Know About
Today’s lesson goes to be somewhat controversial and should ruffle some feathers. I shall blow wide open and debunk tons of the knowledge you've got presumably been exposed to the present far in your trading journey. The average trader is out there walking through a confusing and conflicting maze of data from a spread of sources including; blogs, forums, broker websites, books, e-books, courses and YouTube videos. With of these learning resources available there's naturally getting to be some excellent and a few very bad information, but actually , there just isn’t how for many aspiring traders to understand what to concentrate to, who to concentrate to, or what information is useful and what information is non-beneficial. I’m not getting to pretend that there's how for an aspiring trader to filter this giant sea of data composed by of these resources and mentors out there, because there simply isn’t. knowledgeable trader with 10,000 hours of experience might stand an opportunity of deciding the great from the bad and therefore the valid from the invalid. However, you, the beginner or intermediate trader simply won’t possess that filtering ability yet. Becoming ‘Non-Average’ As traders, we concede to our instinctive feelings of social trustworthiness supported what we see and listen to , often to our extreme detriment. we frequently tend to require a leap of religion with our mentors and have a habit of taking things said to us at face value. we would like to hold close information that resonates with us and is sensible to us, especially if it’s delivered by a well-known source that we've come to understand and trust. The ‘average trader’s brain’ is usually trying to find a shortcut due to the overwhelming desire to form money and be free. The brain wants to urge a winning result immediately with the smallest amount amount of effort possible. If you would like to ever make it as a professional trader or investor, I suggest you are doing everything you'll to avoid thinking with the ‘average trader’s brain‘ and begin being ‘non-average’. meaning becoming far more aware, thinking outside the box more and questioning and filtering the knowledge you read and watch. most significantly , slowing everything all down! This now begs the apparent question…how does one even know what I’m close to write during this lesson is actually valid and factual? How are you able to really be sure? the reality is unless you've got followed me and my posts on this blog for an extended time and know me and know my work, then you can’t really make certain , and that i don’t expect you to easily believe it at face value. If you would like to return back and re-read this lesson during a few weeks, or a couple of months, or a couple of years, after you work out that i'm somebody worth taking note of about trading OR that i'm somebody not worth taking note of about trading, then so be it. So with a degree of healthy skepticism, I ask you to think about the below list of eye-opening secrets that professional traders and therefore the trading industry, don’t want you to understand about or understand. I hope it helps… Visit : توصيات الذهب اليوم FOREX isn’t the sole market the Professionals trade The FX market is large , with billions of dollars per day changing hands. It can cause you to great money if you recognize what you’re doing OR it can send you broke if you don’t. It’s a really popular market to trade globally, BUT it’s not the sole market the professional’s trade and it’s not always the simplest market to trade either. A note on leverage: The brokers and platform providers want you to trade FX on high leverage because the profit margins are very high for them. However, if you trade FX on lower leverage, the profit margins shrink dramatically for them. once you trade FX, start brooding about what can fail rather than just brooding about what can go right. I suggest avoiding stupidly high leverage like 400 to 1, as this will be very dangerous for you if the market moves quickly or experiences a price gap and your stop-loss orders aren’t executed at the worth you set. A more sensible leverage level would be 100 to 1 or 200 to 1, but any higher seems crazy. (Using an excessive amount of leverage is what wiped tons of traders out during Swiss Bank Crisis in 2015, The Brexit choose 2016 and therefore the Currency flash crash in early 2019). Broaden your view: Going forward, it'll serve you well in your trading career to start out watching a spread of worldwide markets including FX, Stock Indicies and Commodities. additionally to FX, I personally trade GOLD (XAUUSD), S&P500 Index USA, the SPI200 Index Australia, and therefore the Hang Seng Index Hong Kong , and sometimes individual stocks on various global exchanges. In short, there's more to the trading world than simply FX. I discuss the foremost popular markets I trade this lesson here. Day trading isn’t what Pro trading really is The internet is crammed with marketing trying to convince folks that the definition of a trader may be a one that spends all day actively trading in and out of the market on a brief term basis, all whilst living the life-style of a Wall St millionaire. there's a significant agenda within the industry to push this story to the masses, it's been relentless for many years . I am yet to satisfy one successful day trader who is consistent over the future and that i have almost 25,000 students and 250,000 readers on this blog. i'm not saying there isn’t a couple of out there, but 99.9% of the people that do this sort of trading or attempt to live up to the standard day trader stereotype are getting to fail and perhaps even harm themselves financially or mentally. Watching a screen all day and searching for trades constantly is that the like a compulsive gambler playing roulette during a casino. The successful traders i do know of (myself included) are watching higher time frames and longer time horizons (minimum 4-hour chart timeframes and predominantly daily chart time frames). they need no restriction on how long they're looking to carry a trade for and that they tend to let the trades find them. The professionals i do know , don't day trade, they are doing not watch screens all day, they are doing not search for trades constantly. they're going to typically fall under the category of a swing trader, trend trader or position trader. The obvious paradox and conflicting reality within the ‘day trader story’ is blatantly obvious. How does a trader who is consistently watching a screen and constantly trading have time to enjoy his life and live the lifestyle? They chose to trade as a profession to possess a life, they didn’t choose it to observe a screen 24/5. Here are some points to think about that employment against the so-called ‘ day trader’: The shorter the time-frame the more noise and random price movement there's , thus increasing your chance of simply being stopped out of the trade. Your ‘trading edge’ features a higher chance of yielding a result for you if you’re not trading within the intraday noise. The same trading edge doesn't work or produce an equivalent results on a 5 min chart compared to a Daily chart. Commissions and spreads churn your account, therefore the more you trade the more you lose in broker platform costs. (I will mention this below) Risk-Reward ratios aren't relative on shorter and longer time frames. Statistical average volatility across different time periods also as natural market dynamics play an enormous role during this . there's much more weight behind higher time frames than lower timeframes. Great trades take time because the market moves slower than most of the people ever anticipate. Trading from the upper timeframes and holding trades for extended time periods will provide you with greater opportunities to ascertain trades mature into big winners. However, shorter timeframes don’t provide you with this same opportunity fairly often .
Disclaimer: None of this is financial advice. I have no idea what I'm doing. Please do your own research or you will certainly lose money. I'm not a statistician, data scientist, well-seasoned trader, or anything else that would qualify me to make statements such as the below with any weight behind them. Take them for the incoherent ramblings that they are. TL;DR at the bottom for those not interested in the details. This is a bit of a novel, sorry about that. It was mostly for getting my own thoughts organized, but if even one person reads the whole thing I will feel incredibly accomplished.
For those of you not familiar, please see the various threads on this trading system here. I can't take credit for this system, all glory goes to ParallaxFX! I wanted to see how effective this system was at H1 for a couple of reasons: 1) My current broker is TD Ameritrade - their Forex minimum is a mini lot, and I don't feel comfortable enough yet with the risk to trade mini lots on the higher timeframes(i.e. wider pip swings) that ParallaxFX's system uses, so I wanted to see if I could scale it down. 2) I'm fairly impatient, so I don't like to wait days and days with my capital tied up just to see if a trade is going to win or lose. This does mean it requires more active attention since you are checking for setups once an hour instead of once a day or every 4-6 hours, but the upside is that you trade more often this way so you end up winning or losing faster and moving onto the next trade. Spread does eat more of the trade this way, but I'll cover this in my data below - it ends up not being a problem. I looked at data from 6/11 to 7/3 on all pairs with a reasonable spread(pairs listed at bottom above the TL;DR). So this represents about 3-4 weeks' worth of trading. I used mark(mid) price charts. Spreadsheet link is below for anyone that's interested.
I'm pretty much using ParallaxFX's system textbook, but since there are a few options in his writeups, I'll include all the discretionary points here:
I'm using the stop entry version - so I wait for the price to trade beyond the confirmation candle(in the direction of my trade) before entering. I don't have any data to support this decision, but I've always preferred this method over retracement-limit entries. Maybe I just like the feeling of a higher winrate even though there can be greater R:R using a limit entry. Variety is the spice of life.
I put my stop loss right at the opposite edge of the confirmation candle. NOT at the edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. I'll get into this more below - not enough trades are saved to justify the wider stops. (Wider stop means less $ per pip won, assuming you still only risk 1%).
All my profit/loss statistics are based on a 1% risk per trade. Because 1 is real easy to multiply.
There are definitely some questionable trades in here, but I tried to make it as mechanical as possible for evaluation purposes. They do fit the definitions of the system, which is why I included them. You could probably improve the winrate by being more discretionary about your trades by looking at support/resistance or other techniques.
I didn't use MBB much for either entering trades, or as support/resistance indicators. Again, trying to be pretty mechanical here just for data collection purposes. Plus, we all make bad trading decisions now and then, so let's call it even.
As stated in the title, this is for H1 only. These results may very well not play out for other time frames - who knows, it may not even work on H1 starting this Monday. Forex is an unpredictable place.
I collected data to show efficacy of taking profit at three different levels: -61.8%, -100% and -161.8% fib levels described in the system using the passive trade management method(set it and forget it). I'll have more below about moving up stops and taking off portions of a position.
And now for the fun. Results!
Total Trades: 241
TP at -61.8%: 177 out of 241: 73.44%
TP at -100%: 156 out of 241: 64.73%
TP at -161.8%: 121 out of 241: 50.20%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 5.22%
TP at -100%: 23.55%
TP at -161.8%: 29.14%
As you can see, a higher target ended up with higher profit despite a much lower winrate. This is partially just how things work out with profit targets in general, but there's an additional point to consider in our case: the spread. Since we are trading on a lower timeframe, there is less overall price movement and thus the spread takes up a much larger percentage of the trade than it would if you were trading H4, Daily or Weekly charts. You can see exactly how much it accounts for each trade in my spreadsheet if you're interested. TDA does not have the best spreads, so you could probably improve these results with another broker. EDIT: I grabbed typical spreads from other brokers, and turns out while TDA is pretty competitive on majors, their minors/crosses are awful! IG beats them by 20-40% and Oanda beats them 30-60%! Using IG spreads for calculations increased profits considerably (another 5% on top) and Oanda spreads increased profits massively (another 15%!). Definitely going to be considering another broker than TDA for this strategy. Plus that'll allow me to trade micro-lots, so I can be more granular(and thus accurate) with my position sizing and compounding.
A Note on Spread
As you can see in the data, there were scenarios where the spread was 80% of the overall size of the trade(the size of the confirmation candle that you draw your fibonacci retracements over), which would obviously cut heavily into your profits. Removing any trades where the spread is more than 50% of the trade width improved profits slightly without removing many trades, but this is almost certainly just coincidence on a small sample size. Going below 40% and even down to 30% starts to cut out a lot of trades for the less-common pairs, but doesn't actually change overall profits at all(~1% either way). However, digging all the way down to 25% starts to really make some movement. Profit at the -161.8% TP level jumps up to 37.94% if you filter out anything with a spread that is more than 25% of the trade width! And this even keeps the sample size fairly large at 187 total trades. You can get your profits all the way up to 48.43% at the -161.8% TP level if you filter all the way down to only trades where spread is less than 15% of the trade width, however your sample size gets much smaller at that point(108 trades) so I'm not sure I would trust that as being accurate in the long term. Overall based on this data, I'm going to only take trades where the spread is less than 25% of the trade width. This may bias my trades more towards the majors, which would mean a lot more correlated trades as well(more on correlation below), but I think it is a reasonable precaution regardless.
Time of Day
Time of day had an interesting effect on trades. In a totally predictable fashion, a vast majority of setups occurred during the London and New York sessions: 5am-12pm Eastern. However, there was one outlier where there were many setups on the 11PM bar - and the winrate was about the same as the big hours in the London session. No idea why this hour in particular - anyone have any insight? That's smack in the middle of the Tokyo/Sydney overlap, not at the open or close of either. On many of the hour slices I have a feeling I'm just dealing with small number statistics here since I didn't have a lot of data when breaking it down by individual hours. But here it is anyway - for all TP levels, these three things showed up(all in Eastern time):
7pm-4am: Fewer setups, but winrate high.
5am-6am: Lots of setups, but but winrate low.
12pm-3pm Medium number of setups, but winrate low.
I don't have any reason to think these timeframes would maintain this behavior over the long term. They're almost certainly meaningless. EDIT: When you de-dup highly correlated trades, the number of trades in these timeframes really drops, so from this data there is no reason to think these timeframes would be any different than any others in terms of winrate. That being said, these time frames work out for me pretty well because I typically sleep 12am-7am Eastern time. So I automatically avoid the 5am-6am timeframe, and I'm awake for the majority of this system's setups.
Moving stops up to breakeven
This section goes against everything I know and have ever heard about trade management. Please someone find something wrong with my data. I'd love for someone to check my formulas, but I realize that's a pretty insane time commitment to ask of a bunch of strangers. Anyways. What I found was that for these trades moving stops up...basically at all...actually reduced the overall profitability. One of the data points I collected while charting was where the price retraced back to after hitting a certain milestone. i.e. once the price hit the -61.8% profit level, how far back did it retrace before hitting the -100% profit level(if at all)? And same goes for the -100% profit level - how far back did it retrace before hitting the -161.8% profit level(if at all)? Well, some complex excel formulas later and here's what the results appear to be. Emphasis on appears because I honestly don't believe it. I must have done something wrong here, but I've gone over it a hundred times and I can't find anything out of place.
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 5.36%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): -1.01% (yes, a net loss)
Now, you might think exactly what I did when looking at these numbers: oof, the spread killed us there right? Because even when you move your SL to 0%, you still end up paying the spread, so it's not truly "breakeven". And because we are trading on a lower timeframe, the spread can be pretty hefty right? Well even when I manually modified the data so that the spread wasn't subtracted(i.e. "Breakeven" was truly +/- 0), things don't look a whole lot better, and still way worse than the passive trade management method of leaving your stops in place and letting it run. And that isn't even a realistic scenario because to adjust out the spread you'd have to move your stoploss inside the candle edge by at least the spread amount, meaning it would almost certainly be triggered more often than in the data I collected(which was purely based on the fib levels and mark price). Regardless, here are the numbers for that scenario:
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 46.4%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 17.97%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 65.97%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 11.60%
From a literal standpoint, what I see behind this behavior is that 44 of the 69 breakeven trades(65%!) ended up being profitable to -100% after retracing deeply(but not to the original SL level), which greatly helped offset the purely losing trades better than the partial profit taken at -61.8%. And 36 went all the way back to -161.8% after a deep retracement without hitting the original SL. Anyone have any insight into this? Is this a problem with just not enough data? It seems like enough trades that a pattern should emerge, but again I'm no expert. I also briefly looked at moving stops to other lower levels (78.6%, 61.8%, 50%, 38.2%, 23.6%), but that didn't improve things any. No hard data to share as I only took a quick look - and I still might have done something wrong overall. The data is there to infer other strategies if anyone would like to dig in deep(more explanation on the spreadsheet below). I didn't do other combinations because the formulas got pretty complicated and I had already answered all the questions I was looking to answer.
2-Candle vs Confirmation Candle Stops
Another interesting point is that the original system has the SL level(for stop entries) just at the outer edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. Out of pure laziness, I set up my stops just based on the confirmation candle. And as it turns out, that is much a much better way to go about it. Of the 60 purely losing trades, only 9 of them(15%) would go on to be winners with stops on the 2-candle formation. Certainly not enough to justify the extra loss and/or reduced profits you are exposing yourself to in every single other trade by setting a wider SL. Oddly, in every single scenario where the wider stop did save the trade, it ended up going all the way to the -161.8% profit level. Still, not nearly worth it.
As I've said many times now, I'm really not qualified to be doing an analysis like this. This section in particular. Looking at shared currency among the pairs traded, 74 of the trades are correlated. Quite a large group, but it makes sense considering the sort of moves we're looking for with this system. This means you are opening yourself up to more risk if you were to trade on every signal since you are technically trading with the same underlying sentiment on each different pair. For example, GBP/USD and AUD/USD moving together almost certainly means it's due to USD moving both pairs, rather than GBP and AUD both moving the same size and direction coincidentally at the same time. So if you were to trade both signals, you would very likely win or lose both trades - meaning you are actually risking double what you'd normally risk(unless you halve both positions which can be a good option, and is discussed in ParallaxFX's posts and in various other places that go over pair correlation. I won't go into detail about those strategies here). Interestingly though, 17 of those apparently correlated trades ended up with different wins/losses. Also, looking only at trades that were correlated, winrate is 83%/70%/55% (for the three TP levels). Does this give some indication that the same signal on multiple pairs means the signal is stronger? That there's some strong underlying sentiment driving it? Or is it just a matter of too small a sample size? The winrate isn't really much higher than the overall winrates, so that makes me doubt it is statistically significant. One more funny tidbit: EUCAD netted the lowest overall winrate: 30% to even the -61.8% TP level on 10 trades. Seems like that is just a coincidence and not enough data, but dang that's a sucky losing streak. EDIT: WOW I spent some time removing correlated trades manually and it changed the results quite a bit. Some thoughts on this below the results. These numbers also include the other "What I will trade" filters. I added a new worksheet to my data to show what I ended up picking.
Total Trades: 75
TP at -61.8%: 84.00%
TP at -100%: 73.33%
TP at -161.8%: 60.00%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 53.33%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 53.33% (yes, oddly the exact same winrate. but different trades/profits)
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 18.13%
TP at -100%: 26.20%
TP at -161.8%: 34.01%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 19.20%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 17.29%
To do this, I removed correlated trades - typically by choosing those whose spread had a lower % of the trade width since that's objective and something I can see ahead of time. Obviously I'd like to only keep the winning trades, but I won't know that during the trade. This did reduce the overall sample size down to a level that I wouldn't otherwise consider to be big enough, but since the results are generally consistent with the overall dataset, I'm not going to worry about it too much. I may also use more discretionary methods(support/resistance, quality of indecision/confirmation candles, news/sentiment for the pairs involved, etc) to filter out correlated trades in the future. But as I've said before I'm going for a pretty mechanical system. This brought the 3 TP levels and even the breakeven strategies much closer together in overall profit. It muted the profit from the high R:R strategies and boosted the profit from the low R:R strategies. This tells me pair correlation was skewing my data quite a bit, so I'm glad I dug in a little deeper. Fortunately my original conclusion to use the -161.8 TP level with static stops is still the winner by a good bit, so it doesn't end up changing my actions. There were a few times where MANY (6-8) correlated pairs all came up at the same time, so it'd be a crapshoot to an extent. And the data showed this - often then won/lost together, but sometimes they did not. As an arbitrary rule, the more correlations, the more trades I did end up taking(and thus risking). For example if there were 3-5 correlations, I might take the 2 "best" trades given my criteria above. 5+ setups and I might take the best 3 trades, even if the pairs are somewhat correlated. I have no true data to back this up, but to illustrate using one example: if AUD/JPY, AUD/USD, CAD/JPY, USD/CAD all set up at the same time (as they did, along with a few other pairs on 6/19/20 9:00 AM), can you really say that those are all the same underlying movement? There are correlations between the different correlations, and trying to filter for that seems rough. Although maybe this is a known thing, I'm still pretty green to Forex - someone please enlighten me if so! I might have to look into this more statistically, but it would be pretty complex to analyze quantitatively, so for now I'm going with my gut and just taking a few of the "best" trades out of the handful. Overall, I'm really glad I went further on this. The boosting of the B/E strategies makes me trust my calculations on those more since they aren't so far from the passive management like they were with the raw data, and that really had me wondering what I did wrong.
What I will trade
Putting all this together, I am going to attempt to trade the following(demo for a bit to make sure I have the hang of it, then for keeps):
"System Details" I described above.
TP at -161.8%
Static SL at opposite side of confirmation candle - I won't move stops up to breakeven.
Trade only 7am-11am and 4pm-11pm signals.
Nothing where spread is more than 25% of trade width.
Looking at the data for these rules, test results are:
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
I'll be sure to let everyone know how it goes!
Other Technical Details
ATR is only slightly elevated in this date range from historical levels, so this should fairly closely represent reality even after the COVID volatility leaves the scalpers sad and alone.
The sample size is much too small for anything really meaningful when you slice by hour or pair. I wasn't particularly looking to test a specific pair here - just the system overall as if you were going to trade it on all pairs with a reasonable spread.
Here's the spreadsheet for anyone that'd like it. (EDIT: Updated some of the setups from the last few days that have fully played out now. I also noticed a few typos, but nothing major that would change the overall outcomes. Regardless, I am currently reviewing every trade to ensure they are accurate.UPDATE: Finally all done. Very few corrections, no change to results.) I have some explanatory notes below to help everyone else understand the spiraled labyrinth of a mind that put the spreadsheet together.
I'm on the East Coast in the US, so the timestamps are Eastern time.
Time stamp is from the confirmation candle, not the indecision candle. So 7am would mean the indecision candle was 6:00-6:59 and the confirmation candle is 7:00-7:59 and you'd put in your order at 8:00.
I found a couple AM/PM typos as I was reviewing the data, so let me know if a trade doesn't make sense and I'll correct it.
Insanely detailed spreadsheet notes
For you real nerds out there. Here's an explanation of what each column means:
Pair - duh
Date/Time - Eastern time, confirmation candle as stated above
Win to -61.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -61.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -100%? - whether the trade made it to the -100% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -161.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -161.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -61.8% and -100% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -61.8%, but before hitting -100%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -61.8% to -100%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -100% and -161.8% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -100%, but before hitting -161.8%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -100% to -161.8%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Trade Width(Pips) - the size of the confirmation candle, and thus the "width" of your trade on which to determine position size, draw fib levels, etc.
Loser saved by 2 candle stop? - for all losing trades, whether or not the 2-candle stop loss would have saved the trade and how far it ended up getting if so. "No" means it didn't save it, N/A means it wasn't a losing trade so it's not relevant.
Spread(ThinkorSwim) - these are typical spreads for these pairs on ToS.
Spread % of Width - How big is the spread compared to the trade width? Not used in any calculations, but interesting nonetheless.
True Risk(Trade Width + Spread) - I set my SL at the opposite side of the confirmation candle knowing that I'm actually exposing myself to slightly more risk because of the spread(stop order = market order when submitted, so you pay the spread). So this tells you how many pips you are actually risking despite the Trade Width. I prefer this over setting the stop inside from the edge of the candle because some pairs have a wide spread that would mess with the system overall. But also many, many of these trades retraced very nearly to the edge of the confirmation candle, before ending up nicely profitable. If you keep your risk per trade at 1%, you're talking a true risk of, at most, 1.25% (in worst-case scenarios with the spread being 25% of the trade width as I am going with above).
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -61.8% - not going to go into huge detail, see the spreadsheet for calculations if you want. But, in a nutshell, if the trade was a win to 61.8%, it returns a positive # based on 61.8% of the trade width, minus the spread. Otherwise, it returns the True Risk as a negative. Both normalized to the 1% risk you started with.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100% - same as the last, but 100% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -161.8% - same as the last, but 161.8% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100%, and move SL to breakeven at 61.8% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then full TP at 100%.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread take off half of position at -61.8%, move SL to breakeven, TP 100% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you took of half the position and moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then TP the remaining half at 100%.
Overall Growth(-161.8% TP, 1% Risk) - pretty straightforward. Assuming you risked 1% on each trade, what the overall growth level would be chronologically(spreadsheet is sorted by date).
Based on the reasonable rules I discovered in this backtest:
Date range: 6/11-7/3
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
Demo Trading Results
Since this post, I started demo trading this system assuming a 5k capital base and risking ~1% per trade. I've added the details to my spreadsheet for anyone interested. The results are pretty similar to the backtest when you consider real-life conditions/timing are a bit different. I missed some trades due to life(work, out of the house, etc), so that brought my total # of trades and thus overall profit down, but the winrate is nearly identical. I also closed a few trades early due to various reasons(not liking the price action, seeing support/resistance emerge, etc). A quick note is that TD's paper trade system fills at the mid price for both stop and limit orders, so I had to subtract the spread from the raw trade values to get the true profit/loss amount for each trade. I'm heading out of town next week, then after that it'll be time to take this sucker live!
Date range: 7/9-7/30
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 20.73%
Starting Balance: $5,000
Ending Balance: $6,036.51
Live Trading Results
I started live-trading this system on 8/10, and almost immediately had a string of losses much longer than either my backtest or demo period. Murphy's law huh? Anyways, that has me spooked so I'm doing a longer backtest before I start risking more real money. It's going to take me a little while due to the volume of trades, but I'll likely make a new post once I feel comfortable with that and start live trading again.
WikiFX: the murky business and the murkier methods
https://preview.redd.it/1rf74ljv34l51.png?width=960&format=png&auto=webp&s=566235871ce22dd3078f0532dfb672bff6eb0707 The irony of financial markets is that this business that officially has got as much regulation as arms trafficking, has also got the same problem –- numerous illegal entities that evolve around the niche. Scam brokers, funds recovery services that rob the robbed traders, HYIPs, “learn how to make millions overnight” trading courses and a number of other schemes all tend to exploit the weak point of human nature – the belief that there is the magic device with the “MORE MONEY” button out there, that someone can sell you.
A thief shouting “Thief!”
Considering the above there is a high demand in society for truthful and unbiased information about the market players. WikiFX claims to be the provider of such honest information about brokers but in fact, makes money by blackmailing brokers and promoting any company that offers to pay enough in their rankings. WikiFX is a classic illustration of a thief shouting “Get the thief!” louder than anybody else in the crowd. The strategy works unfortunately and traders tend to trust WikiFx broker’s ratings without questioning what these ratings are based on and who sponsors this global brokers’ database.
Paving the road with some good intentions
Even the most horrible crimes against humanity were done under the cover of best intentions. Starting with the first crusades and ending with the holocaust. There are always some sound arguments, protected people and reliable methods. Ask any trader whether each forex broker must be regulated by a third party? The answer will be “yes” with a near 100% probability and this answer is totally correct. Know-your-customer procedures and some unbiased third-party control are essential for maintaining the overall transparency of any business in a sphere of finance. This is the argument that WikiFX starts with when promoting its service and there is absolutely no point to argue. Starting with an indisputable truth is a good strategy to win the debate. “The long-term presence on the market adds credibility”, – says WikiFX, and hears “yes” again. “Don’t you agree that the longer the company is in the business, the better?”. “Sure”, – the trader agrees one more time. The mission is completed. This is when the broker ranker can add any other criteria to their appraisal methods. Traders will tend to trust the service because they’ve agreed upon the most important criteria. The rest are minor details. But what if the rest of the appraisal methods are not just minor issues? What if these details can be the means to manipulate the facts as much as they want to?
Can WikiFX appraisal criteria be trusted?
If we take a look at any broker’s WikiFX rating, we can see that the criteria of appraisal are the following:
The year of registration
Market Making license
For example, this is what the top-rated broker’s summary looks like at WikiFX: WikiFX Forex com example https://preview.redd.it/t4ugtbt344l51.png?width=625&format=png&auto=webp&s=95fddf8434faf8938d1a3f18bbd5f1da2ceb47e4 Looks good. Really. Regardless of the attitude to this particular brokerage, the work seems to be done fine. All the regulators are listed below, the information on the used software, licensing, and years of operation is included. But what if we take some other random brokerage with one of the lowest rankings at WikiFX? NinjaTraderBrokerage WIkiFX Ranking https://preview.redd.it/pgyqp0u644l51.png?width=631&format=png&auto=webp&s=eb268faac83608a494c31a39eb1621f7132e3520 This is where the truth reveals itself. Once again, regardless of the attitude to this particular brokerage this is really easy to find out what they do, what licenses they’ve got and what kind of software they use. Suspicious clone? Seriously? If WikiFX staff cared enough to do any investigation prior to stamping that “Suspicious” mark on the brokerage, they would have seen that both domains, nijatrader com and ninjatraderbrokerage com belong to the same entity. NinyaTrader whois data https://preview.redd.it/2097lkw944l51.png?width=563&format=png&auto=webp&s=079cc4248b825a3cd941c6b691a67bb9769f4f7f If they cared enough to collect information on the brokerage from at least one reliable source, like Investopedia or any other similarly known database, they would also have found out that the company not only provides the brokerage service, but also is known for its trading platform with advanced technical analysis tools. But the only trading software that WikiFX considers reliable seems to be MT4/MT5. They simply ignore the fact that trading does not evolve around MetaTrader products, no matter how good and popular they are. WikiFX lowers the score of any brokerage with custom-developed software. We can clearly see this with the above example. Other criteria that WikiFX is proud to use for the broker’s appraisal are regulations. Using the same example let’s see how well they do the appraisal in this field. As you can see above, WikiFX used the “Suspicious Regulatory License” stamp for NinjaTrader Brokerage. And here is what The National Futures Association, that NinjaTrader is registered with as a futures broker has on its record: NFA regulation of NTB proof that WikiFX did not consider to be trustworthy https://preview.redd.it/di8fwkdd44l51.png?width=629&format=png&auto=webp&s=2de618d5df26bd8fcca99c51a6030f4bdfa7f776 We can’t expect every trader to know that any futures broker that wants to operate on the US market must be a member of NFA. This is the requirement of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission regarding the futures broker’s operations. But this is totally unacceptable for a broker ranking website, which WikiFX claims to be, to mark NFA-registered futures brokerage as non-reliable. By the way, did you notice on the above screenshot that NTB has obtained the NFA license in 2004? Yet, this does not prevent WikiFX from claiming that the brokerage has only been providing its services for 1-2 years only, instead of the factual 16 years of operations. We can long discuss the reasons that lie behind such selectivity of WikiFX but this random example clearly shows that any brokerage that provides access to non-forex derivatives trading or dares to suggest custom-developed software to its traders is in danger of receiving a negative review at WikiFX regardless of the factual reliability and regulations.
What lies beneath WikiFX selectivity?
WikiFX claims to have a team of professionals that are all involved in objective appraisal of broker’s services, licenses and used software. The methods used by these professionals remain unrevealed and as we see from the above comparison two similarly reliable brokerages can get any score from 1.0 and up to 10.0 at WikiFX, no matter what regulations they’ve got, for how long they’ve been in the business and what kind of software they use. This is difficult to say what lies behind such selectivity with 100% confidence. The first thing that comes to mind is that WikiFX might be affiliated with some brokers. The hypothesis gets even more realistic if we try to understand who sponsors WikiFX. There are no transparent built-in ads neither on the web-version of the website nor in its applications. There are no paid subscriptions for access to the database. This means that users sponsor the service with neither their attention to ads nor directly. Being the non-charity and non-governmental organization WikiFX can’t be sponsored with donations or a government. The only option that we have left is that brokers sponsor this ranking system directly, which automatically makes the whole system non-reliable and highly biased. The only transparent method that we know WikiFX uses to collect money is sponsorship fees they collect from their offline events participants. Let’s have a look at the exhibitors of the recent WikiFX Expo in Thailand. WikiFX Expo Exhibitors
TLC is a non-regulated investment platform that was founded in 2019
Samtrade FX is not regulated by any of the agencies that WikiFX itself lists as reliable
Forex4you is not regulated by any of the agencies that WikiFX itself lists as reliable
B2 Broker is a non-regulated broker
XDL FX is a non-regulated broker
VAT FX is a non-regulated broker Six out of sixteen WikiFX recent expo exhibitors do not have proper legal status according to the “standards” of WikiFX itself. This fact does not prevent them from promoting the services of these companies at their offline events. This conspicuous fact tells a lot about the attitude of WikiFX to common traders looking for reliable partners. Reputation is nothing but a sale item for this brokers’ ranking system.
Murky & Murkier
So far we’ve only discussed the facts that anyone can check himself using free tools and sources. It was not that difficult to discover that WikiFX uses non-transparent standards for brokers’ appraisal. It ignores the specifics of some brokerages lowering their scores due to non-standard derivatives they offer to trade or custom trading software. It also promotes non-regulated and non-licensed brokerages, which is 100% against the declared WikiFX values and mission. The rumors are that this company was also noticed blackmailing brokers with the purpose of making them pay for better reviews at WikiFX. There are also some signs that indicate suspicious promotion of WikiFX platform through social media and Quora. Some of the WikiFX positive reviews also look highly suspicious. All of the above is a matter of further investigation. Nevertheless, thousands of users keep relying on the information provided by this scam ranking system. It may even look like all these users are satisfied. WikiFX has got 4.5 starts at Google Play, which sounds good enough. However, positive WikiFX reviews use similar semantics and are also highly suspicious. Despite the high average grade, Google Play finds the following messages to be most relevant and brings them to the top of WikiFX reviews: Google Play most relevant WikiFX reviews https://preview.redd.it/kftutvcl44l51.png?width=532&format=png&auto=webp&s=1ccb74ee156388285a2fab711dd604945c04377c
You’ve got the facts now and it’s time to make your own conclusions.
With Bitcoin Suddenly Surging, Canaan Stock Is Also Going Up Today
What safe pennystocks brokers can you guys recommend? (Only the ones where you have actually withdrawn profits count)
Hi guys! :) I believe this is a good question for anyone who's new, especially coming from Europe, as we can't use WeBull or Robinhood, which I believe work pretty safe under all the regulations and after I've seen so many of you guys using them (though that doesn't guarantee you were able to easily withdraw profits still). I've been digging in some of the old posts but I am very anxious about starting an account with brokers such as:
and the list could go on and on when it comes to brokers like those. I know these sites, especially Forex Peace Army, and these are mostly real opinions and reviews from real people who were scammed. Thing is, in the past I used to work with the Prosecutor's Office and investigators on cases of brokerage scams, and plenty of such companies (even some of these I named) were also involved at times. I am really anxious about it as I can see everywhere people writing about playing against the brokers, so your loss is their gain clearly and I know some of the victims myself, who were simply scammed and robbed off of their hard-earned money, even life savings at times. I've been trading normal stocks through my brokerage account at my bank in Poland, but I have no idea how can I safely trade pennystocks like you guys and be sure that if I actually become successful I am not going to be denied by the brokerage company that is going to come up with hundreds of excuses, technical problems, delays, questions for documents and verification, not replying etc. in order not to let a withdrawal go through. I know this all too well. Can you guys recommend any legitimate brokers that are regulated by SEC or other financial authorities in the US for a non-US citizen? I don't trust CySEC, ASIC etc. - these guys are paid to give out licenses to anyone who pays well, so that's not safe at all, especially CySEC. Look how proud they were of IronFX in the past. I will really appreciate any answers I can get :) Thanks!
I wanted to write a quick post in answer to the people who routinely make claims I have a history of stealing from people in my previous company and base this upon a blog they read. If you would like to discuss this further, please make a post and link it to me to engage on. I will do so as long as we deal with the facts of how a PAMM company really works. I won't engage in circular debates where the essential point is, "I don't believe you". You don't have to - that's not how any of this works. Just fact check.
I want to avoid Google ranking on this post. Although for my personal 'PR' it would be beneficial to aim to rank something answering claims, at some points in this some others involved in the company will not really come over in the best light. I assume it's likely these people are still involved things (Not spoke with them for 5 yrs) - It'd be unfair to rank bad PR on them. The failure of the company was squarely due to me. Anything anyone else did either would not have happened or not have mattered if I'd done better. I do not want anything I do now to further hinder anyone. So I will refer to names by only one letter (or number if applicable).
I found it strange at the time this ended up centred around the ponzi scheme side of things. There was a reasonable question to be asked and answered as to if it was a pyramid scheme. Were people signing up just to sign people up, or was there a core product of fair market value. The services sold I'd previously ran at the same sort of price point direct to market - so I felt on fairly good ground on that. Initially I's actually been a bit excited initially, because I was a reader of the blog in question and I liked the work they'd done on pyramid schemes. I thought I'd be able to either validate I was doing things right, or learn how I should be doing them better. I never thought the ponzi side of it would take any more than a few minutes to clear up. But that was not so ... A ponzi scheme was to all intents and purposes impossible. All of our business was done via three different brokers and all of our results publicly tracked with close to real time updates for marketing purposes. Of the three brokers we were using, two of them had good regulation. An off-shore broker had to be used for US clients, so this is the only one with any sort of question mark. All of our results over all the brokers were almost identical (Some execution/costs variance). The two regulated brokers were under different regulators. Most, if not all, the brokers held clients funds in segregated accounts. All brokers would have to have been fully complicit in the scam - and it costs more to get regulated than there was to steal. Logically, it could not have been so. We were using a PAMM model. This works by the client opening a brokerage account and signing a LPoA to allow trades to be copied onto their account. The LPoA grants the company no access to the funds. Money laundering laws also dictate the funds can only be redeemed to same source they were funded. PAMMs are big business. Protection of all parties is built into it, it's a well trusted model. This should have taken no less than 5 minutes to self verify. It could not have been a ponzi.
That happened. Turns out if you set up a PAMM in the Netherlands and then let a bunch of people refer investment to it this is classed as running a ... I can't remember exactly and even at the time it was in Dutch so I didn't personally read it all. The underlying problem was not the model in any way. We were told at the time we basically jut had to pay £2,000 for each country we did business in. We were global. At this time the company had neither the money to do that, or pay the fine they gave us for not having the money to do that. My mistaken assumption was that since when you run a PAMM you are basically piggybacking off the broker's licence, all was well and good. This was true - but the problem was sourcing. Paying people to refer investment was what we were fined for when you get right down to it.
This was just a headline. In many ways it's misleading. Firstly, nothing was stolen or even taken. It was lost or given away to clients who'd lost in the PAMMs that went bad. All the money lost was lost trying to get enough money to make good all the PAMMs. So it was not stolen, and there is nothing in anyway to imply that's a suitable word to use. In the blog, no explanation of that is offered. What seems to be inferred is that this was commissions due out to clients that the company kept. Even outside the above mentioned this would be wrong. All affiliates were paid. You will not find a single one who says they were not. Further to that, of all the funds invested into the company (We'll call the company '5') somewhere in the 60 - 70% range was sourced directly by me. Other funds were sourced by my co-founder. Investments were made through passive advertising without them being attributed to a refer. All in all, assuming we did not pay the affiliates and we had this much, $18,000 would be the number. Of the $180,000 somewhere a bit over $100,000 would have been mine. I never took that, and could not have "Stolen" it. I don't see the point in getting super technical on everything by going through how, but the number also probably wasn't $180,000. I think this was an overestimate made in a throw away comment by my co-founder (We'll call her 'M') who was (Justifiably) extremely angry at me at the time she came up with the number and added it in a post (Of this multi paragraph post, this one line and one number was taken - if memory servers, all context was left out when the blogger cited this as stolen. Which would make sense. The post was berating me for losing the money. That didn't fit the narrative.
What Backs the Story?
Of all of the claims of wrongdoing (Apart from the fine, which is documented and true) - there is no evidence proposed for any of the claims made. All of it hinges on a story told to the blogger by one person, who was another of my co-founders 'We'll call her 'E'. E was either a late teenager or very early 20s at the time. In the founding of 5, E was essential. Before 5 I'd been running a service selling trading signals and selling them at $5 a week subscription. I was generating a lot of business (Working all day, every day and having fun with it. Like I did here for a while, but at that time I really was marketing). 5 - 10 people a day could be signing up. I knew nothing at all about how to structure an online business. No listing of new clients to send emails. Nothing about making membership sites with password access etc. I was working off a Wix site I made myself with no on-boarding system in place. The volume of people joining was crushing me. I could not process them and was getting a lot of PayPal disputes. I wanted to send them the stuff. Just did not have the process to ensure this was being done. E stepped in and saved me on that. She made original 5 website (On Wordpress, I believe it was later upgraded to something else). Set up memberships payments. Automated listing. Also she suggested changing the name to what the company became. E made the work I was doing work. After that, she had varying performance. Her gripe in the blog is she was not paid for helping to found the company. Left out of this is the fact she was not paid because she was head of marketing and we were not getting enough clients. Almost all of them coming from me hitting the DMs and signing people up the old fashioned way. On results of trading, everything was going well (and this was my area). Things were going so well people legit through it must be a ponzi! But we did not have in-flow of clients. On this I again blame myself. I sort of assumed this would all work itself out and did not put focus on fixing problems before they became problems. There was a lot of pressure on everyone. E got into a new romantic relationship. I think she was heavily influenced by this person (I found E to be good hearted on the whole). E and M started to get along less and less. Then E and M seemed to hate each other. It all seemed to come from nowhere, but it quickly got to the point me and M felt it was not working with E, and she thought the same. Pretty much everything is based upon the story told to the blogger by E. As I've said before I found her to be a good heart overall and believe she was influenced into doing what she did, and would not have done it on her own gumption. Therefore I won't rip into her; but if you're reading, 'E' (Won't be lol) - that was a bit naughty, wasn't it? Little 'Economic with the truth'.
Why would the blogger post such big claims with no evidence?
People should ask themselves this on the first read through of the blog, to be fair. If you're a single source reporting on a story - tell how you know it's true. I think this mainly came down to revenge. After the ponzi thing I wrote blog line by line ripping the initial blog to bits. It was written in a very cheeky sort of tone, and what I was saying was right. He then played, "My blog's bigger than your blog" , on which he was right. If you think there is some smoking gun here in any way, just email the blogger and ask them how they know. What evidence were they ever given any money was stolen. There was none.
Money taken from the company:
In it's sad and drawn out end, cash on hand and assets within the company got down to around $10,000 and we were due out over 10* this to clients who I wanted to pay back. I was not bringing in new business (It seemed unethical to do until I fixed old problems - this was a miscalculation. No business was the big problem) and there was the 50K fine. The company was essentially bankrupt. I wanted to use the remaining 10K to have one last ditch effort to re-coup losses, or randomly select clients to pay the 10K to. M didn't. At this time we fell out (Forever). I have no idea what happened to that 10K. I think M probably kept it. At the time I was livid about that - but to be honest, after all the work she did she deserved something. Losing was not her fault. To 'M' if you're reading (Won't be), I'm sorry.
What went wrong?
I was not good enough. When I got ahead I thought I was coasting. I came from a background of having nothing and as soon as I started to make a few grand I assumed I was gliding to being a millionaire. I stopped learning. Stopped improving. I never watered what I planted, and it withered and died. I fail. Turns out you can not coast up a learning curve without ending up on your arse.
European Banks - Where Can I Easily Open a Bank Account?
Choosing a foreign bank to open an account in is a difficult task. Many details must be taken into account so that you don’t run into failure or problems with account operations in the future. Today, we have gathered 7 banks that will easily open an account for you (sometimes even remotely) and will not strictly monitor transactions on it. https://preview.redd.it/s19up259z6951.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=0e1b7d2ea22bc9871082ec856f5ab5d7a32d8038 FIO Banka Country: Czech Republic Year of foundation: As an online broker - since 1993, as a bank - since 2010. FIO is the most loyal bank in Europe. There, you can open an account for any type of activity, from FOREX to gambling. There are no extra fees for maintenance or minimum balance and limits. Of course, the FIO does not require documentary evidence of the payments made. Documents required to open an account:
foreign passport and internal passport;
apostille of the Certificate of Incumbency to the corporate director or founder, if the company is older than 6 years;
strictly colored scans of all documents;
account opening term: 2-3 days
Do I need a personal visit to the bank? Yes. After reviewing the documents by the bank, you need to personally visit the department to verify your identity. CSOB Banka Country: Czech Republic Established: 1964 CSOB Banka is the second largest bank in the Czech Republic in terms of capitalization and one of the most influential banks in Europe. There are no restrictions on dollar payments and a minimum deposit. You can manage your account through the online banking. CSOB is loyal to operations via the account, and does not require confirmation by agreement or invoice. Documents required to open an account Personal account:
passport or another identity document.
confirmation of address.
apostilled set of legal documents for the company.
If the company is with a nominee service, remote identification of an individual as a director or shareholder is required. Account opening period: 5-7 days. Do I need a personal visit to the bank? Yes. After reviewing the documents by the bank, you need to personally visit the department to verify your identity. Ceska sporitelna Country: Czech Republic Established: 1825 Ceska Sporitelna is a very loyal bank that does not require confirmation of each payment made. All financial tasks can be quickly solved with the help of Internet banking. Documents required to open an account:
statutory documents for the company (originals);
full extract from the Register without apostille (only for Czech companies);
Certificate of Good Standing with an apostille (for 3+ months companies);
beneficiary's domestic and foreign passport;
certified power of attorney to open an account;
a brief description of the business or website URL for online business;
account opening period: 7-14 days
Do I need a personal visit to the bank? Yes. After reviewing the documents by the bank, you need to personally visit the department to verify your identity. MKB Bank Country: Hungary Established: 1950 MKB Bank is one of the largest banks in Hungary. An account will be opened for free, if necessary, a plastic Visa or MasterCard will be issued. You can open an account for an offshore company, but MKB will refuse this if the company is registered in a country from the OECD black list. Nevertheless, the MKB is quite loyal to the operations carried out on the account.. Documents required to open an account: Personal account:
power of attorney declaration;
Charter and memorandum of association of a company certified by a notary;
Protocol on the appointment of officers;
Certificate of incorporation, certificate of shares and certificate of good condition;
Power of attorney;
Account opening period: 7 days.
Do I need a personal visit to the bank? Yes. After reviewing the MKB package of documents, you must visit Hungary and meet with a bank agent. BOS bank Country: Poland Established: 1991 BOS Bank is a Polish bank. If your company is not older than a year, then account maintenance in the first 18 months will be free. There, you can open an account for offshore companies and any other activities. The bank is loyal to transactions carried out on the account. Documents required to open an account: Personal account:
extract from the registry translated into Polish and notarized;
Account opening period: 14 days.
Do I need a personal visit to the bank? No, the account can be opened remotely. Bank Zachodni WBK Country: Poland Established: 2001 Bank Zachodni WBK is the third largest bank in Poland in terms of assets. The bank is not picky about corporate documents, opens accounts for any kind activities. Documents required to open an account: Personal account:
extract from the registry translated into Polish and notarized;
account opening period: 14-21 days.
Do I need a personal visit to the bank? Yes. After reviewing the documents by the bank, you need to personally visit the department to verify your identity. ING Bank Slaski Country: Poland Established: 1988 ING is the largest bank in Poland. The bank opens accounts for onshore companies and is loyal to non-resident customers in Poland. You can issue a Visa or MasterCard plastic card. Documents required to open an account: Personal account:
Extract from the registry translated into Polish and notarized;
The crypto market’s correlation with traditional markets (by Robert Aron Zawiasa)
https://medium.com/@Zawiasa/the-crypto-markets-correlation-with-traditional-markets-79e8209a6d8 At the time of Corona virus and the — not so related — economic meltdown, many questions the correlation between the virtual economy of cryptocurrencies and the “trad” one. Why is it such an important question? For many years crypto evangelists predicted Bitcoin as a new safe-haven, the “digital gold”. — Oh boy, they were wrong. The correlation is not imaginary, trad market players now have significant capital in cryptocurrency and when they need to pull liquidity to cover fiat liabilities, they just do it. The reason for the steep drop in % terms is because the BTC market is not liquid enough at this point in time. Is it a problem? A heresy of the crypto evangelion? A heresy for sure, but not a problem at all. Let’s be honest and admit it: The crypto community found nothing unusual in the recent price-drops. I, myself even shorted the market, because crypto is still full of promises but lacking adoption.
Okay, so they are correlating and crypto is full of shit and scammy and basically the same, right?
Not so! Do you remember the times when we had to wait days for a transaction? Paying with wire transfer for something in China was insanely expensive? When merchants preferred cash over credit cards, because of high fees? When you had to hire a broker for investing? Those times are gone and yes, not because of crypto solved these problems, but crypto definitely accelerated this transformation, urged the financial world to change rules or die. Now what if I say, this is only the beginning and these are only entry-level benefits of what really crypo promises?
Crypto promises us the “digital America”
Uh, I said it. Crypto is the new land and all the resourceful wants their own pieces of it. The reason behind why so many are thinking about Bitcoin as the digital gold is because the digital America’s gold rush is happening now. We all know deep in our consciousness that the world is heavily changing, the youth is changing, society is being digitalized even if brain-computer interfaces are not a thing yet..
Damn son you are weird and I stopped reading here.
The reason you feel weird about our descendants living online is because you know it will happen, but stay in the present now and I will tell you what crypto is doing to our traditional economy!
What is the “crypto dream”?
Many of the early adopters joined not because they wanted to make money, but because they think the current money system is unfair. Common citizens are paying the highest on almost everything and most of the time they don’t know about it. The financial sector’s practices are so hidden, almost like an occult knowledge. There are a few people who understand it and then there are everyone else, the vulnerable. This makes the first statement of the dream:
Financial systems should be transparent.
One of my biggest frustration as a teenager was I did not see real good opportunities in the world. I read about them, I saw them in historical movies, but in reality workplaces were boring and abusive, investments were only for the rich. Neither the booming housing market or fake forex trading seemed like a good fit for me. I had very little money, but a big passion to forge my fortune.
Opportunities should be there for everyone.
The wolves of Wall Street created our current system in the ideology of “I own what I could acquire” and backfired each other just like everyone did. They have done this, because there is no trust in the traditional world, but trust is heavily needed. But if things are transparent and open, we only need one more thing to wake up from this nightmare:
Cooperations should work without trust.
You read it right, a trustless environment provide uncheatable cooperation. There is no single entity that has authority over the system, and consensus is achieved without participants having to know or trust anything but the system itself.
I don’t eat your utopian bullshit! Your software is written by people I still need to trust.
People tend to be happier to direct trust towards organizations than systems. However, while organizations are made up of people who are easily corruptible, trustless systems can be governed entirely by computer code. All of the source code in crypto should be accessible to everyone. If it is not, then it is not a part of our ecosystem.
The technology behind crypto
Many being confused about the blockchain, thinking it is not a big deal. We had many software far older than Bitcoin, implementing the very same ideas. What Bitcoin had — which made the blockchain a very unique thing — is philosophy. It was intended to use a special way and confronted a very big thing, nobody thought it could be possible to confront. The blockchain is a way to store information. A decentralized, fully transparent one, which is accessible for everyone 7/24. It never stops, It cannot be stopped and people make it doing different things. The first use case its inventor made it doing is persisting transactions, money transfers. He told all of us it is just an experiment, which he didn’t tell is the capabilities of this technology. So fast people realized it is possible to do extraordinary things with it, like running a whole computer on the blockchain, making it behave like a virtual computer instance. No one did things like this before: A global computer which cannot be stopped, which is capable to run all kinds of software on it.
What was the impact?
People go mad about it, especially greedy people who don’t know a bum about the technology but have money to pour in. At one point, the fundraising softwares running on the Ethereum global computer had more impact and volume than the whole VC industry in America. This was only the early rising of crypto, 2017 spring. Later that year, everyone hopped on the train who were brave or stupid enough. Did crypto had a real economy at that point? Was it an industry? Real-world adoption? NOPE It was a bitter funny hype train, challenging everyone inside or outside the community, but it showed us one thing: We have the gold. Not so much people are capable to find and extract gold, to be honest: Most of us are just lurkers, fortune hunters and times could be rough when a mass hype destructs all the mines, but people had keep going, continuing the work.
How the crypto economy relates to the traditional economy now?
It is expanding much faster than any other economy in the world. Our frontiers in adoption are companies like Crypto.com paying hundred millions of dollars ($50 bonus for every new customer) to onboard millions of users, others like Coinbase paying $166 anyone to motivate in learning about cryptocurrencies. Handshake is airdropping hundreds of dollars (on current rates) to open-source developers and these are just a few examples of how generous and prosperous our thriving world is. In comparison: Revolut, a fintech company which is very similar to Crypto.com only paid 10 USD for new card holders and no one would ever pay you to educate yourself about financials. Developers? They historically get a fraction of a fraction of the pie in Silicon Valley. (Sorry Y Combinator, you are a delightful exception) These companies I mentioned are very traditional ones and they are not innovating in software, but keeping our gates open to the new world. I don’t want to credit here any of the thousands of developer teams, all working on the “real deal”. I only leave here a link to the list of all variants of the Bitcoin source code alone. Understanding what blockchain companies are working on is a whole new profession now. The idea of a crypto company is the DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization). Which covers trustless, often anonymous and fully transparent organizations with profit sharing and they are aimed to become better alternatives to traditional companies. Most of us in the community have different understanding, proposals and hopes about what a DAO should be, but common sense tell us it is the next big thing to emerge.
Wild West is Happening
We are building railway systems across the land, making connections and interoperations between blockchains. We are attracting a lot of immigrants day-to-day, because we have better paying workplaces, better interest rates and in overall a flourish economy. We are growing a strong identity to support our nation as the blockchain developers, economists, philosophers and investors. Our money is under our control as we own our future and all of us knows: We will soon show the world, what we are capable to achieve. This is my view of the crypto world. This is the manifesto of “digital America”. RAZ contact me at zawiasa.hu
Out of the hundreds of binary options brokers in the world, there is only a handful that we currently recommend. These recommendations are based on my experience with the websites, the companies that operate them, and the features and quality each broker offers. Trust is always the number one essential criterion . Those hundreds of brokers that do not make our recommended list have a variety of problems. Some of them simply do not offer enough in terms of features, while others are incompetently operated. Many however are actually flat-out untrustworthy. They are run by malicious individuals out to rob you. They are scammers, plain and simple. There are a lot of ways that binary options brokers scam customers. Sell you useless systems and alert services. This is not really a scam you take action on if the systems were provided as a “free” benefit at a certain account tier, and it is questionable whether you could ever report them for it even if you did purchase them. Why? Because in the small print they invariably mention that the system does not guarantee results. Manipulate expiry times and prices. This is one of the most common binary options scams and Forex scams. You are in a certain trade, and it is set to expire in a few minutes. At the time that the trade is meant to expire, you are in the money. But then for some unimaginable reason, the clock keeps running. A few seconds later, it stops, but the trade is a loser. The broker will claim it is a site error and point toward terms and conditions stating they are not responsible, but it is almost certainly malicious. Refuse to pay out your money. This is another very common scam. You try to get your money out of your account and get a huge runaround. Either you find yourself wading through excessively complicated terms which are impossible to meet, you keep having to send in paperwork even though you already submitted everything, or the broker just ignores your withdrawal request and possibly disappears after absconding with your money. What do you do if you think your binary options broker is scamming you? Well, first off, you have to make sure they are scamming you. It is always a good idea to try to resolve the issue before you assume your broker is maliciously operating. If you cannot get the problem solved, though, you will have to take action against the company. You can take the case further to a recovery company for them to assist you in recovering your funds from the fraudulent broker and the best company to achieve that for you is Cromton tech. Cromtontech.org is a recovery company that assist victims of scams and bogus investment platforms to recover their private key and funds back in no time. With proof of transaction you carried out with these bogus investments cromton tech can track this transaction and bring these scammers to justice. With the help of Taintchain ( a new tech that is used by law enforcement to track wallet address), cromton tech has been able to track wallet address and recover funds from those wallet address. Contact cromton tech today for fast and reliable recovery and the best part is that you don’t have to pay for their service charge until your funds have been recovered. I hope this answers your question
Trading the financial markets in Australia when conditions are volatile can be difficult, even for experienced traders. Apart from the educational and other resources made available online, another important factor for traders to consider is the platform that a broker offers.Aussie brokers forex Choosing a reliable and trustworthy forex broker that meets your needs and specific trading goals is essential, but in such a highly competitive market, how do you make the best decision? To gain access to the financial markets, you'll need a broker that you can rely on. Read on to learn more about the factors you should consider when choosing a broker. You can see a list of the best Australian brokers here.
5 Factors to Consider when Choosing a Broker
Follow these five rules for selecting a broker that's right for you:
Look for a broker that has a good track record/longevity in the market so that your strategy is your primary concern for navigating the markets. Established in 2008, and in operation for 11 years Plus500 have a head office in Israel. Plus500 is regulated. This means Plus500 are supervised by and is checked for conduct by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN 509909) and Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission (License No. 250/14) regulatory bodies.
Choose a broker that's at the forefront of innovation and generally considered an industry-leader. Plus500 offers both an online trading platform as well as a mobile platform giving clients easy access to markets. In addition, Plus500 supports the popular third-party trading platform, MetaTrader 4(MT4)enabling access to a variety of markets worldwide that can be traded with the assistance of expert advisors or a customizable automatic trading strategy. Plus500 is a world-leader when it comes to innovation and they are always looking at ways to improve and to maintain their competitive advantage.
Commissions and fees
Ensure that your broker is transparent with fees and those dues are competitive. Plus500 offers competitive spreads for Forex trading with an average of 0.9 pips for EUUSD and a margin requirement ranging between 2 – 5% depending on the pair traded.
Plus500 offers 24-hour support where clients are able to call or contact the helpdesk via email, twitter or a chat service.
Comprehensive Trader resources
Make sure your broker offers free resources like analysis, education and risk-management tools. With a wealth of knowledge from top analysts, Plus500 work together to bring the latest news and insights to traders. For most traders, the first – and sometimes only – concern is pursuing their 'edge'. While that is surely important, along with sound money management habits, to navigating the markets; that step alone does not represent the full preparation. As each trader dives into this important venture, it is important not to forget the most rudimentary yet crucial steps such as selecting the best broker to access the markets. If you are interested in learning more about investing you can learn more here.
https://preview.redd.it/eur0lwj56l441.png?width=2000&format=png&auto=webp&s=7995238ba794c0609af20eaecb0905795de38e53 Bitcoin Forex Brokers are a thing of the future. Such brokers are one of the few ways through which you can increase the overall value of your Bitcoin. Nowadays, everyone knows what Bitcoin is. In fact, more and more people learn about cryptocurrencies overall – and not only about the biggest one out there. As a result, many individuals want to take advantage of this new type of currency. Even if cryptocurrencies have been here for a while, people only now understand how beneficial they can be to their finances, especially in terms of trading. Therefore, they started looking for forex brokers that trade in Bitcoin as well. However, there are a couple of things that you should know before you start working with a Bitcoin Forex Broker. Keep all of the following in mind, as they may save you not only time but also some money!
Regulated Forex Brokers
Even though most unregulated FX brokers accept Bitcoins, it is very important that you search and use only the regulated ones. If a Forex broker is unregulated, this means that they cannot be held liable if, for example, they shut down and don’t return your funds. Given that one Bitcoin is currently worth around $8k, it goes without saying why you wouldn’t want to trade it on an unregulated platform.
Why Would You Trade Bitcoin through a Forex Broker?
After you find a reputable, regulated Forex broker, it’s time to determine whether you really want to trade Bitcoin through them. If not, then the other way would be to use a Bitcoin exchange system. Here are the main reasons why trading Bitcoin through a Forex broker is optimal:
Security – as mentioned above, you wouldn’t want to trust your Bitcoin with an unregulated Forex broker; the same applies for a Bitcoin exchange. There have been many cases of fraud and scams involving Bitcoin exchanges, so it is much better to simply rely on a Forex broker.
Lesser Charges – exchange services usually tax a commission, in order to make some money. They usually charge around 5%, meaning that you’d lose $5 for every $100 that you win. On the other hand, taxes practiced by Forex brokers are very small – even as low as 0.1 pips.
Leverage – there are brokers that come with a 100:1 leverage. This means that, if you were to buy a Bitcoin worth $1000, you’d only need $10 in order to buy it. Moreover, if the price of what you bought rose and made you a profit, you’d keep the entire profit – $100 or even more – even though you only put down $10 for that investment.
Multiple Ways to Trade – with a Forex broker, you can use the Bitcoin that you have to make a profit no matter if the value of the cryptocurrency goes down or up. This is because you can also short sell Bitcoin, allowing for multiple ways to trade your currency – and not only convert it to cash, like with exchanges.
Bitcoin Forex Brokers are certainly a thing of the future. If you farm Bitcoin, for example, such brokers are one of the few ways through which you can increase the overall value of your Bitcoin. On the other hand, if you are a speculator and catch the market off guard, you can purchase Bitcoin at a low price and then trade it for other currencies that you think may increase in value. However, it is important to know the risks as well, especially the risk that comes with unregulated Forex brokers. It is better if you go with the more reputable brokers on the market!
www.topasiafx.com TAFX is a global Forex Trading place where they give most priority on Asia based trader. We work for a beginner, intermediate and advanced level trader. It is an open source where you'll find the most comprehensive/ultimate guides, trusted broker reviews/list, signal/analysis and the recent news on Forex (Foreign Exchange/FX).
FUD Slaying: Why “DYOR” is More Important Than YouTube Videos and Internet FUD
Hello everyone, I am here to discuss the recent FUD presented by a relatively unknown YouTube reviewer. I intend to discuss his methodology and the actual points themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=1hH5_FAEzyo This is his YouTube video based on the document in question. He wrote the document. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XQlAGIDPjDoQNHtzEWGdbO9i8MUkc4lZFKYLTZzMpYU/edit First, to get this out of the way, the reviewer has only been around on the social media scene for a short while. The views of his videos are only in the hundreds and his twitter was created a week ago. He is basically a "nobody" at this point. I don't mean that to be disparaging. He literally came out of nowhere. He is unproven and his methodology is inconsistent and extremely questionable. With that said, just because he came out of nowhere doesn't mean he might not have a point, so let's look at his rating methodology to get a better idea of his process. Oh and if you do not want to read all this, here is the TL:DR: The guy doesn't know what he is talking about. He doesn't has much idea of what he is doing when writing reviews. His research is lazy. I actually feel I wasted my time responding to this, but I am going to do it anyway. When rating a project, he uses the following categories: MVP (minimum viable product), ease of research, team, roadmap, community (bonus), solving a problem, does it need blockchain, token use, red flags, competition, presentation, token vesting, demand/value, scarcity, customer service, best in field (bonus), active use, size of market, development (bonus) These are pretty good things to look at, but he failed to look at GitHub contributions (or other source code related sites), so he can't really tell if a project is scammy or not. So, how well did he check this stuff out? Rating the team: When looking at his review of GVT, the only way to get an idea of this person's methodology is to look at his reviews of other projects. When rating the team there are basically two basic routes a person can take. You can analyze the team itself, or you can bundle the team and the advisors together and rate the project as a whole. The reviewer is inconsistent in his reviews. In this category he bundles the entire team and advisors on some projects whereas he just looks solely at the team in other reviews. His research is absolutely lazy. He gave Polymath a 0 rating for their team, but their website links to their company LinkedIn page and lists all 26 employees. It was not hard to find this. Even if it weren't on the site, a simple google search would have revealed who the team is. Polymath has a great team with some decent “stars” on it. It makes no sense to give them a 0. The reviewer doesn't know what he is doing. Difficulty in finding the team deserves docking points in "ease of research", and it does not deserve giving the entire category a 0. The point of this category should be to evaluate the merits of the team members, which is something he does not do in most of his reviews. He gave Selfkey a perfect score stating: "Team: 20 Points - Superstar team and advisors" This means he is bundling the team and advisors together. If so, any issues with advisors deserves docking points from that category, not docking at additional 20 points because of one advisor. Looking at Selfkey, I don't know where the he gets the idea that they have a "superstar team". What does that even mean? I checked their profiles. Some of them only came onto the project recently and their LinkedIn pages are nothing to write home about. Some of them don't even have LinkedIn pages. He gave the GVT team 13 points, but then docked 20 points because he didn't like Charlie Shrem. Do you realize the ridiculousness of this? The GV team category effectively gets -7/20 points because the reviewer does not like Charlie Shrem. That is worse than giving the team 0/20. Charlie is only one advisor with no actual power over the GVT team's operations. He cannot execute any commands over the GV team or force them to do anything. The GV team can fire Charlie. Charlie cannot dismantle the GV team. That power balance is important. The rating makes no sense at all. Also, he docked the Changelly advisor because his company has bad customer service? Really? What does that have to do with his ability to advise the GV team on the things they need from him? Fact of the matter is his business is still running. The same cannot be said for advisors of other projects (more on that soon). If you are going to rate the team and include the advisors, the value should be 3:1 or even 2:1. Even if you gave the advisors a score of 0, the category score should not be that low. GVT's advisors are absolutely amazing. To call them weak is ridiculous. With regard to Nuls: "Asian team, isn’t on LinkedIn. No way to research." They get 0 points because they are Asian and don't use the sites you like to use? The language used allows that statement to be interpreted in a very negative way. There are non-Asians on that team as well. There is a way to research them. There are bios of each team member if you scroll over the pictures. You can then use that information to do more research on them. You are just too lazy. Looking at The Key, their members are definitely not "all-stars". Their team is unknown and they have 3 relatively unknown advisors, only one of which has a LinkedIn page. Love him or hate him, Charlie Shrem is a crypto superstar compared to these people. Interestingly they are more of an "Asian team" than Nuls. That didn't seem to affect the score much though. He gave the Bounty0x team a perfect score, but he obvious didn't bother to research every member of the team or their advisors with much effort. As an example, Terry Li is the Bounty0x solidity developer. If you check his LinkedIn page you will find a few serious red flags. He hasn't held a job for over a year. He has no visible programming experience. He has been a solidity developer for 10 months with no prior history or proof that he can program well. I cannot stress this enough: you do not want your solidity developer to be a programming newbie. This will spell disaster for your project. When you look at their advisors there are some serious red flags as well. I picked two advisors to research and I found out that both of them have had their companies fail. One of them even declared themselves unsuccessful in a Facebook post. I don't want a project to be advised by people with a bunch of failed startups. Changelly having bad customer service pales in comparison to advisors whose project's failed. Bounty0x's advisor team is filled with failed entrepreneurs and members of their team lack experience in the jobs they are assigned. Also, their "Backend and Solidity engineer" has only been with the project for a month, and his blockchain programming experience is nonexistent. They do not deserve a perfect score in this category. GVT has a team with years of programming experience, but more importantly, they have years of experience programming financial software. These are exactly the type of people you need on your team. To the reviewer: Either bundle the advisors into the team rating or give them a separate category. Do not be inconsistent in this category. Do not bring a team's ethnicity into play as a factor for anything. Please do actual research on all the members, and please define what it means to be a "superstar". Please learn to navigate websites. Polymath's team is there. Your inconsistency and lack of research in this makes you appear incapable of judging a team. There is no clear methodology here. All your reviews are questionable because of this. Roadmap: He gave 0 points to GVT for their roadmap being hard to read. But the key point is this: They have a roadmap. There is no reason to give 0 points in this category. Not only that, the roadmap is decently detailed with many goals and objectives. The roadmap isn't some simple points on a line like Enigma's roadmap. Speaking of which... He gave Enigma 0 points for not having a roadmap at all.... But they do have a roadmap. The guy didn't do his research. https://en.decentral.news/2017/12/27/ico-analysis-enigma-catalyst-realm-crypto-trading-machines/ It can be found here. MVP: Having a minimum viable product be worth only 10 points is ludicrous. Any project that has an MVP basically utterly destroys a project that doesn't. More importantly, the reviewer didn't actually bother to use the MVP on what he reviews. He gave Polymath 0 points for their demo, but gave GVT 10 points for theirs. I am going to be blunt about this. GVT's demo is a non-functional interface demo. GVT's MVP comes on April 1. Polymath does not deserve a 0, and GVT does not (as of 3/21) deserve a 10. They both deserve a 5. He didn't bother to actually check out GVT's demo, which goes to show he doesn't actually research things properly. He gave Enigma a 3 for an MVP not available to the public and Selfkey a 5 for an MVP not used by the public. Eh? He gave the Authorship a 10 for their MVP but claims he cannot find any info about them. How is that supposed to work? He gave Po.Et 0 points for their MVP because he couldn't find it. Here you go buddy: https://github.com/poetapp/wordpress-plugin It's right there. You just failed to find it. It isn't their fault your research is bad. Ease of Research: The reviewer either needs to dock points for research being difficult in their respective categories or dock research being difficult in this category. Do not "double dip" and dock points in both categories. This category is irrelevant since the reviewer already docks points in their respective categories. Also, this category is subjective because it is based on the reviewer's research skillset. Community: He uses coingecko's score or numbers from their telegram channel but there isn’t much evidence that he actually bothered to check out their communities much. Reeks of laziness and has nothing to do with the quality of a community. This really shouldn't even be a category if he is going to give points based on this. High telegram channel members has little meaning. Solving a problem: The reviewer’s inability to understand the problem that a project solves should not be held against it. Polymath is quite clear in the problem it solves. He gives projects that solve problems of identifying people a 10, but gives projects that solve problems of identifying intellectual property a 3. That makes no sense. Those are both problems that need to be solved by the blockchain. The idea that he finds one more important than the other is clear bias. Token Use: The author does not understand the GV product. GV is platform agnostic, and more importantly GVT needs as little outside influence as possible. There is a very specific reason why GVT has to be used in place of ETH. ETH would technically be a middleman in this sense. GV's success is not meant the be tied to ETH's success or ETH token price manipulation. GV's success isn't even meant to be tied to crypto's success. GV is designed to succeed even if ETH or crypto fails. GVT actually deserves a 10 in this category. GVT is needed to use the platform. Money is transferred using GVT. Profit is returned using GVT. Other services such as GV Markets will also function using GVT as gas. The utility of GVT is needed in all aspects of the platform. This gives the token great utility and investment value. If 1 Billion is invested through the GV platform, GV's market cap includes that 1 billion because the token is needed to transfer that 1 Billion around. This provides great incentive to invest in the platform and a great reason for the token price to grow in value. No other project that this much incentive or ways to bring value to their token as much as GVT. I am surprised the reviewer cannot see this. GVT is also market agnostic. The entire crypto market can fail and GVT can still maintain value through profits brought in from the Forex and stock markets. This will make it extremely resilient over time. Presentation: The purpose of GVT is quite clear. It is broken down on the website and the presentation clearly explains why it is needed as all levels of trust management including the brokers, customers and managers. All that info is very clear on the front page of the site. 0/10? GVT presentation isn't the problem here. It seems the reviewer only watched the video which is just one part of the presentation. Everything is on the site and in the whitepaper, which the reviewer apparently didn't even fully read. Token vesting: He colors it yellow for GVT but green for other projects that also get 5 points... visual bias is apparent. He gave one project a 10 for an 18 month vesting period and a 6 to another project for the same period with little justification for such a disparity. Supply/Scarcity: GVT receives 3 points because 44M tokens were available during ICO but only sold about 4M. This makes him believe that they didn’t create much demand. “Everyone who wanted GVT got it.” The US and Singapore could not participate. Also, Bounty0x failed to reach their soft cap, but the reviewer didn’t dock any points for that. If everyone who wanted GVT got it then the marketcap wouldn’t be where it is today. What a terrible assumption he made. Competition: He gave GV a 5/10, but his reasoning made little sense. “Covesting and coindash are used to trade cryptocurrencies while GVT is for cryptocurrency AND non-crypto trading. They will still compete for a portion of the same market. People will have only so much fiat to invest.” You do not use fiat to invest in Covesting or Coindash. Also, GV will allow people who are into stocks or forex to bring their money into crypto. No other coin is doing what GVT does. Covesting and coindash, arguably, are projects that try to compete against just one part of the entire GV platform. GVT is more than that and should have a higher score because there is basically no competition. There is competition for some of its features, but not for the platform as a whole. He gave Bounty0x a 20-point bonus for "Best in Field"... but they are the best because they have no competition. As a matter of fact, there is no reason for a 20 point "best in field category" when you already have a competition category worth 10 points. He gave Funfair a 5/10 even though he states "No competition in FunFair’s niche"... That would automatically make it the best in its field if it has no competition as well. Why does a project that has no competition effectively get 30 points (10/10 + 20), while another project with no competition get only 5 (5/10 + 0)? I will tell you why. It's because the author doesn't know what he is doing. Guy's I am going to be honest. I am tired of doing this. You get my point. His reviews are an inconsistent and poorly researched mess. I've written around 8 pages worth of content covering this. If there is anything else you need me to compare, please write it in the comment section.
MOST TRUSTED FOREX BROKERS. 1.IC Markets: IC Markets is the world’s largest true ECN australian forex broker, regulated by top tier australian regulator named ASIC (AFSL No. 335692). Also it gained licence from CySEC. So it is considered as a safe broker. It started its journey from 2007 and running very successfully. Its my favourite broker. Benifits: One of the safest broker to deposit ... Forex Rank’s Forex broker list Info on only the most trusted Forex Brokers in the industry. Click on any of the brokers below to find out more about them. Check out Forex Ranks top Forex Brokers List for 2020 below!. Forex Broker List. You will be able to find key details on each broker such as Broker Type, Regulatory body, Minimum Deposit, Account Base deposit Currency, Maximum Leverage ... List of top 10 most trusted forex broker 2020 in the world by FXDailyReport.com, Lets compare our reliable online trading company and platforms. Most Trusted Forex Brokers. But despite the fact that there are clearly some untrustworthy web brokers out there in the forex world, it’s also the case that some brokers are more worthy of your trust. Many legitimate forex brokers have taken steps to gain the trust of their users, whether that’s by implementing rules against money laundering or simply by segregating client funds away from ... Our most trusted forex brokers. 74% of clients lose money. Capital at risk. - Trusted Global Market Leader - Online FX & CFD Trading - 180+ Global Markets, 84 FX pairs, 65 shares, 17 popular indices and more - Forex, Indices, Commodities, Equities & Bitcoin - Available to US traders. OPEN AWARD WINNING DEMO ACCOUNT . Read Broker Review. Your capital is at risk - Trade 15 cryptocurrencies ... Trading with a trusted forex broker is crucial for success in international currency markets. As a currency trader or investor, you may have specific needs related to which platform, tool, or research requirements you have. Understanding your investment style can help determine which fx broker will be best for you. Each year, our team here at ForexBrokers.com spends five months testing the ... In our forex brokers reviews list, we have taken into account a wide range of ranking factors, from fees and spreads, to trading platforms, charting and analysis options – everything that makes a broker tick, and impacts your success as a trader. The “best” forex broker will often be a matter of individual preference for the forex trader. It may come down to the pairs you need to trade ... List of the best 23 Forex Brokers Trusted Reviews. Are you looking for a good and serious Forex Broker? – Then this page is the right place for you. Thanks to the large selection on the Internet it is often difficult to make the right decision. With more than 7 years of experience in the financial markets, we present you with the best providers with top service and without hidden costs ... Brokers Regulated Forex Brokers. When viewing the Forex Broker or a trading platform, it is the paramount priority to choose from the hundreds the most reliable one and the Best Forex provider, as it will determine the whole trading experience. Indeed, doing research and compare the vast number of Forex Brokers with many aspects to consider ...
List of the best 21 Forex Brokers 2020 // Comparison and Trading Review
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. ★★Top Trusted Forex Brokers List★★ RISK WARNING: YOUR CAPITAL MIGHT BE AT RISK Trusted Forex Brokers Click Here to join: Exness: https://bit.ly/2DOYLyx FXTM: https://bit.ly/2Gid9Tp ... These are our top 3 forex Brokers! Insanely I forgot to mention who ranks best for spreads & currently Blueberry Markets seems to be giving you the best bang... List of the best 21 Forex Brokers for 2020 - Review and comparison Visit our website to view the list: https://www.trusted-broker-reviews.co... Subscribe to our channel: https://bit.ly/37H1zeh In ... Here is list of top true ECN brokers for forex and CFDs Trading from https://fxdailyreport.com/true-ecn-forex-brokers/ Visit http://fxdailyreport.com/top-10-forex-brokers/ - Top ten best and trusted forex trading brokers in the world good for online currency trade business in...