Prop Firm Hub | Page 583 | Metals Mine

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Anyone trading with a Prop firm 31 replies

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

prop firm new model - my trading journey 871 replies

Attachments: Prop Firm Hub
Exit Attachments

Prop Firm Hub

  • #11,641
  • Oct 16, 2022 7:39am Oct 16, 2022 7:39am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-Maybe you give traders too much credit. I personally believe that most bad traders will keep coming back, taking challenges (or direct-funding) indefinitely in hopes of making it, especially when the barrier-to-entry is so low with some of these prop offerings. It seems clear to me that most of the traders signing up for these programs do not know what they are doing, and are likely just gambling. That kind of addiction can be strong. {quote}-I do not believe this. Perhaps the flow of new traders will slow down, but it will never cease so...
Maybe you are right, I do not know it. It is just some speculation on it and some observation. I hope you are right with your assumptions. Always hope for the best.
  • #11,642
  • Oct 16, 2022 7:43am Oct 16, 2022 7:43am
Quoting TrAndy1
Because from my searches I find that most newer prop firms have a score below FTMO's score, so there is not much risk for them.
-Not sure that I am understanding you correctly here. Are you saying that the firm's risk is greater if their trader-score is better?
  • #11,643
  • Oct 16, 2022 7:45am Oct 16, 2022 7:45am
My assumption, that the crowd gets more intelligent over time and the more skilled traders will survive at props, is based on swarm optimization in nature (seen by birds or ants too). So this is a phenomen which can be seen often in nature and is also used for optimization purposes to achieve faster results than brute force optimization. So the crowd should get more intelligent over time or as time passes than single individuals (like animals), because of their behavior as seen and noticed in the nature.
  • #11,644
  • Oct 16, 2022 7:47am Oct 16, 2022 7:47am
Quoting TrAndy1
My assumption, that the crowd gets more intelligent over time and the more skilled traders will survive at props, is based on swarm optimization in nature (seen by birds or ants too). So this is a phenomen which can be seen often in nature and is also used for optimization purposes to achieve faster results than brute force optimization.
-Do these phenomenon take into account greed and addiction?
  • #11,645
  • Oct 16, 2022 7:58am Oct 16, 2022 7:58am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-Do these phenomenon take into account greed and addiction?
Do not know it exactly, I am not a biologist. But it is for achieving a goal and looking for an optimal solution as I can recall.

Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-Not sure that I am understanding you correctly here. Are you saying that the firm's risk is greater if their trader-score is better?
Yes, the higher the score the less the profit margins based on similar (relative) trader statistics. So the only assumption is here that there are not better traders (in sum) at other prop firms. So there should be a homogenity among the profitability and success of the trader crowd among all prop firms. This is the basic assumption here.
  • #11,646
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:02am Oct 16, 2022 8:02am
Quoting TrAndy1
Yes, the higher the score the less the profit margins based on similar (relative) trader statistics..
-But your score chart is primarily based on cost-value, right?

If so, I do not think that you can assume that a firm with a better score will carry more risk. I believe that MFF, for example, has a much stronger leg to stand on, in terms of long-term survivability, vs. let's say FTMO, simply for the fact that MFF has a direct-funding model, which is a zero-risk way for them to bring in massive capital.
  • #11,647
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:08am Oct 16, 2022 8:08am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-But your score chart is primarily based on cost-value, right? If so, I do not think that you can assume that a firm with a better score will carry more risk. I believe that MFF, for example, has a much stronger leg to stand on, in terms of long-term survivability, vs. let's say FTMO, simply for the fact that MFF has a direct-funding model, which is a zero-risk way for them to bring in massive capital.
Yes. And the conclusion is based on score. Of course I respect your different opinion. I just say that when you compare two flagships like MFF and FTMO, then FTMO has a higher chance to survive because of the lower score, which means less risk for them and thus higher profit margins based on their cost structure too. Other props are smaller and thus could have more risk because of higher fix cost and in addition higher fluctuation of payouts because the number of traders are not that huge like MFF.
  • #11,648
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:11am Oct 16, 2022 8:11am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-But your score chart is primarily based on cost-value, right?
The score is only based objectively on the prop firms offer on their challenges. It has nothing to do with the size of prop firm, or their cost structure or any soft factors.
  • #11,649
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:13am Oct 16, 2022 8:13am
But there is a strong observed correlation between the props score (as value from their offers) and the size of prop firm, as you can see it on MFF, TFTP, then TFF, E8 as a result. The only exception is here FTMO, as they have with distance the longest history and be the first FX prop firm at all. But they are loosing ground as it looks like.
  • #11,650
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:21am Oct 16, 2022 8:21am
Quoting TrAndy1
Of course I respect your different opinion. I just say that when you compare two flagships like MFF and FTMO, then FTMO has a higher chance to survive because of the lower score, which means less risk for them and thus higher profit margins based on their cost structure too.
-But the direct-funding model allows for greater profit margins and decreased risk. Does it not?

Quoting TrAndy1
The score is only based objectively on the prop firms offer on their challenges.
-So, cost-value, correct?
  • #11,651
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:25am Oct 16, 2022 8:25am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-But the direct-funding model allows for greater profit margins and decreased risk. Does it not? {quote}-So, cost-value, correct?
Yes, on how you define cost-value as fee-value or cost for the trader to value the trader gets. And instant funding model is basically no different but there is no challenge so there are different statistics. It is all based on traders statistics whether instant funding model based on its offered score/value leads to gains (& less risk) for props.
  • #11,652
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:29am Oct 16, 2022 8:29am
Well, then you cannot say that FTMO has a better chance of survival than MFF. The amount of pure profit that MFF brings in from their direct-funding model has to be considered, and you do not seem to be factoring that in with your scoring system.
  • #11,653
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:31am Oct 16, 2022 8:31am
Quoting TrAndy1
{quote} Yes. And the conclusion is based on score. Of course I respect your different opinion. I just say that when you compare two flagships like MFF and FTMO, then FTMO has a higher chance to survive because of the lower score, which means less risk for them and thus higher profit margins based on their cost structure too. Other props are smaller and thus could have more risk because of higher fix cost and in addition higher fluctuation of payouts because the number of traders are not that huge like MFF.
Good analysis.

Higher the score, good for users.

Lower the score good for firms.

When users becomes extra intelligent in prop trading model, FTMO scores the best in view of survival.
Intraday only.
  • #11,654
  • Oct 16, 2022 8:32am Oct 16, 2022 8:32am
Quoting Nsak3y
Well, then you cannot say that FTMO has a better chance of survival than MFF. The amount of pure profit that MFF brings in from their direct-funding model has to be considered, and you do not seem to be factoring that in with your scoring system.
Yes, you are right, but you also have the assumption that there is substantial generated fee from instant models for MFF. This is only speculation as you do not know that. To me it looks like the far majority of fees and thus profits MFF make from challenges and not from their other models. Because they are less favorable for traders.
  • #11,655
  • Oct 16, 2022 9:03am Oct 16, 2022 9:03am
Quoting CableJ
I will never understand this fascination finding every new prop firm with zero proof of actual payment history when these traders are likely not maxed out with either MFF or FTMO.... somebody make it make sense!
I cannot make it make sense. There are 5-6 firms, if maxed, give you close to 3 million, in 16 months, if you scale , you're at 6 million. They all have impeccable payout history.
  • #11,656
  • Oct 16, 2022 9:46am Oct 16, 2022 9:46am
Quoting TrAndy1
but you also have the assumption that there is substantial generated fee from instant models for MFF. This is only speculation as you do not know that. To me it looks like the far majority of fees and thus profits MFF make from challenges and not from their other models. Because they are less favorable for traders.
-I cannot speak about percentages across the different models, obviously, but spend some time in their discord and even among various forums, and you will see that there is great interest in the direct-funding models. There is evidence of that even in this thread.

But I am not assuming anything about the amount of traders that take on the direct-funding model, only that the profit-potential and nearly zero-risk are a fact. So, this must be considered when looking at the survivability of a firm. Whether this model is beneficial to the trader is another matter.
  • #11,657
  • Oct 16, 2022 7:49pm Oct 16, 2022 7:49pm
Quoting TrAndy1
The score is only based objectively on the prop firms offer on their challenges.
-I would be curious where your scoring system would put a firm like fidelcrest. Their targets are higher, but they offer a bonus option (free account) that lets you choose between doubling your capital or having a second chance at the challenge. They also pay out a large bonus following completion of phase-2, depending on the account size/type.

I do not know of anyone here that has experience with fidelcrest, but I believe that they have been around for a few years already.
  • #11,658
  • Oct 16, 2022 11:42pm Oct 16, 2022 11:42pm
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-I would be curious where your scoring system would put a firm like fidelcrest. Their targets are higher, but they offer a bonus option (free account) that lets you choose between doubling your capital or having a second chance at the challenge. They also pay out a large bonus following completion of phase-2, depending on the account size/type. I do not know of anyone here that has experience with fidelcrest, but I believe that they have been around for a few years already.
But they have a trailing drawdown model. If they changed to fixed drawdown I think they would be very competitive.
Plan your trade, trade your plan
  • #11,659
  • Oct 17, 2022 5:37am Oct 17, 2022 5:37am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-I would be curious where your scoring system would put a firm like fidelcrest. Their targets are higher, but they offer a bonus option (free account) that lets you choose between doubling your capital or having a second chance at the challenge. They also pay out a large bonus following completion of phase-2, depending on the account size/type. I do not know of anyone here that has experience with fidelcrest, but I believe that they have been around for a few years already.

I just read it from you. If you succeed that second account looks very attractive. There are some small letters somewhere I guess. Like the second account you can get it after some profit.
  • #11,660
  • Oct 17, 2022 6:23am Oct 17, 2022 6:23am
Quoting Eren10
{quote} I just read it from you. If you succeed that second account looks very attractive. There are some small letters somewhere I guess. Like the second account you can get it after some profit.

What you get is a new challenge account to go through phases 1, 2 again.

So not interesting.
78 traders viewing now