Prop Firm Hub | Page 808 | 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

  • #16,141
  • May 27, 2023 8:39pm May 27, 2023 8:39pm
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-In terms of target vs. draw-down, many firms require between 110% to 150% total gain on the account, over the course of the challenge/verification phases. I am now seeing firms that are pushing 1-step challenges as something great, but are requiring a 200% gain on the account, at the same or higher cost as a 2-step equivalent. The model may be a 1-step model, but the amount of profit that you have to gain on the account makes it almost equivalent to a 3-step model. People are falling for it, as usual. I think, if you are maxed out and looking...
Just like they fall for the "instant funding" garbage, the 1 step model is indded asking for more than a 2 step, 13% with 8% (MFF) even the OG FTMO 15% with 10% are better than 10% with 6% even if it is "one step". Then they add in the trailing DD and charge the same or more for the account. Sucker born every minute.
This is not even taking into consideration, the finished product.... once you pass, your live account has 6% DD as well.
  • #16,142
  • May 27, 2023 8:46pm May 27, 2023 8:46pm
Quoting sampat
{quote} Again that depends on trading style. Probability of passing 1 step challenge is higher than 2 step for high lot trader. For example If I trade really big lot like 40-50 lots on a forex pair even though it is 200% gain probability is way higher in 1 step as in 2 step you have to flip twice.
You're not flipping twice, most firms it's 50% (5% with 10% DD), MFF is 43% phase 2 (5% with 12%DD). MFF is only slightly higher than flipping once OVER 2 STAGES (13% with 12% is only 108%)
  • #16,143
  • May 27, 2023 8:53pm May 27, 2023 8:53pm
Quoting Expo33
{quote} It's like saying I went to a $20 all-you-can-eat food buffet and blaming the restaurant for making you eat yourself into a food coma. No, you ate yourself into a food coma because you're a gluttonous slob. But then again, we live in a world where it's always someone else's fault for our behavior.
So true my friend. Our country is littered with victims of every description. Always someone else's fault. Never any self-accountability.
  • #16,144
  • May 27, 2023 9:00pm May 27, 2023 9:00pm
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} You're not flipping twice, most firms it's 50% (5% with 10% DD), MFF is 43% phase 2 (5% with 12%DD). MFF is only slightly higher than flipping once OVER 2 STAGES (13% with 12% is only 108%)
Agree but for gambling it does make difference for example
Lets say Phase one challenge is having standard 5% overall drawdown and 10% target and if I trade 50 lots of GU I need only 20 pips target and 10 pips to wash out
Imagine same trader is using 2 phase challenge he needs to make 16 or 20 pips (8% or 10% target) but he has to do again on phase 2 plus wait times
For somebody trading huge lot size your probability of passing challenge increases in 1 phase.

Any one who is not gambling will not choose 1 phase as it doesn't make sense like you mentioned in your comments.

Also phase 1 challenges have relative drawdown so they encourage traders to swing on fences
  • #16,145
  • May 27, 2023 9:25pm May 27, 2023 9:25pm
Quoting acetrader
{quote} So true my friend. Our country is littered with victims of every description. Always someone else's fault. Never any self-accountability.
Easy to tell you're in the USA. The government creates it.
  • #16,146
  • May 27, 2023 9:49pm May 27, 2023 9:49pm
Quoting sampat
{quote} Again that depends on trading style. Probability of passing 1 step challenge is higher than 2 step for high lot trader. For example If I trade really big lot like 40-50 lots on a forex pair even though it is 200% gain probability is way higher in 1 step as in 2 step you have to flip twice.
Quoting sampat
Agree but for gambling it does make difference for example Lets say Phase one challenge is having standard 5% overall drawdown and 10% target and if I trade 50 lots of GU I need only 20 pips target and 10 pips to wash out Imagine same trader is using 2 phase challenge he needs to make 16 or 20 pips (8% or 10% target) but he has to do again on phase 2 plus wait times For somebody trading huge lot size your probability of passing challenge increases in 1 phase.
-I look at it from a mathematical perspective since math does not lie and can be more-easily measured. It is easy to say that there are differences between 1-phase and 2-phase challenges, but to say which is easier or better will depend on many factors, some of which may be difficult to measure and/or may not even be definitive.

If your target for 1-step is 200% and your total target for 2-step is 110%, you cannot tell me that a 1-step challenge will be easier. Why? Because you can do it without stopping? That doesn't really compute. You would have to argue psychological factors that cannot be measured in order to present any meaningful reasoning.

Because the fact is, you will have to either take on more risk, or, increase your exposure to market in order to make up the difference. To say that having to stop and then start again is a big enough hurdle to consider the 1-step over the 2-step is something that I cannot understand. If you are saying something else, then I guess I do not really understand what you are saying.
  • #16,147
  • May 27, 2023 10:05pm May 27, 2023 10:05pm
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote} {quote}-I look at it from a mathematical perspective since math does not lie and can be more-easily measured. It is easy to say that there are differences between 1-phase and 2-phase challenges, but to say which is easier or better will depend on many factors, some of which may be difficult to measure and/or may not even be definitive. If your target for 1-step is 200% and your total target for 2-step is 110%, you cannot tell me that a 1-step challenge will be easier. Why? Because you can do it without stopping? That doesn't really compute....
Agree but those who apply maths or know trading will avoid phase 1 as almost all of them have relative drawdown. Even if it has only 100% target instead of 200% I still think 1 phase challenge is inferior to 2 phase. I even rate phase 1 below direct funding. It is just marketing gimmick which creates illusion of less work faster funding. 1 phase challenge is quick way to cashback on gamblers or scamming newbies.
  • #16,148
  • May 28, 2023 12:02am May 28, 2023 12:02am
I am seeing a trend with new firms recently, offering 1-step challenges, as if they are some great thing. For example, I saw a video of a review for FX2 Funding the other day. Another one is Lark Funding. These firms are offering 5% max draw-down on a 1-step challenge model, where you have a 10% profit target. That is a 200% return, so flipping an account twice.

Lark is offering their 100k 1-step challenge for $700 and FX2 is offering their 100k 1-step for $900. This is approximately 40% to 80% more expensive than MFF's 2-step 100k program. MFF requires only 8% and 5% for their phases, which is 13k total. The draw-down allowance is 12k (not 5k), so that is roughly a 108% return, so flipping an account a little over 1 time.

With FX2 and Lark, you are not only required to generate 92% more profit, but you are also going to have to pay 40% to 80% more for the privilege to do so. Plus, you are getting less than half of the allowable draw-down on the account!

These models are junk, and I see no benefit being offered over most traditional, 2-step models. Maybe there are some decent 1-step models being offered somewhere, but these particular examples are designed for suckers.
  • #16,149
  • May 28, 2023 1:55am May 28, 2023 1:55am
"gambling, the betting or staking of something of value, with consciousness of risk and hope of gain, on the outcome of a game, a contest, or an uncertain event whose result may be determined by chance or accident or have an unexpected result by reason of the bettor's miscalculation." Trading is gabling no different than the farmer growing 1000 acs of wheat. The farmer does not know if a hale storm, drought, locust, or any other unforeseen event. Will destroy all or part of his crop. Neither does a trader know the future. A good trader calculates the risk, and tries to take the likely side. Its always a gamble. Whether, or not we try to lie to ourselves or not. The risk of anything with a uncertain outcome is gabling. Gambling is a required part of living. Crossing the street is a gamble. Driving a car is a gamble. Gambling is a necessity to live. Many try to separate trading, from gambling for moral purposes. Most things have a risk in life. We would all be dead, if we didnt take some risk.
those who can, do. those who cant, talk about those who can
  • #16,150
  • May 28, 2023 6:18am May 28, 2023 6:18am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Easy to tell you're in the USA. The government creates it.
So true & only getting worse by the year. But they are here to help us. Haha fat chance.
  • #16,151
  • May 28, 2023 6:54am May 28, 2023 6:54am
Quote
FXIFY is fully backed by FXPIG (https://fxpig.com/fxify), a well established, regulated broker and the founding team have over 30 years of collective trading & brokerage experience.

Does this mean it could be (statistically speaking) a bit more safe than other new companies ? What's your opinion ?
  • #16,152
  • May 28, 2023 8:36am May 28, 2023 8:36am
Quoting gatorinla
"gambling, the betting or staking of something of value, with consciousness of risk and hope of gain, on the outcome of a game, a contest, or an uncertain event whose result may be determined by chance or accident or have an unexpected result by reason of the bettor's miscalculation." Trading is gabling no different than the farmer growing 1000 acs of wheat. The farmer does not know if a hale storm, drought, locust, or any other unforeseen event. Will destroy all or part of his crop. Neither does a trader know the future. A good trader calculates...
Absolutely correct in the definition of gambling. What a great post. You have listed things with varying degrees of risk, in others words, not all "gambling" is the same.
I personally believe, anything in which you have an edge, although gambling by defintion, is not truly gambling. Trading is one of them. The lottery is not. Poker is. Casino games are not. In other words, you can gamble on games of skill or games of chance.
Of course, the games of skill require a large sample size to prove the edge. A good trader can lose any one trade, any 5 trades, even maybe 15-20 consecutive trades. However, over the course of 1,000s of trades, a good trader will be in profit.
I, personally, can sit down and lose any one hand of poker, have AA cracked 4 times in a row, lose 3 nights in a row, etc, but over the course of 10,000s of hands I am a profitable poker player.
On the flip side, things such as casino games (games of chance), you have a better edge SHORT TERM. If you walk into a casino and go on a run at blackjack, roulette, craps, etc.....GRAB YOUR MONEY AND RUN. These games have the house odds built in, meaning the opposite of my above examples....the larger the sample size, the greater the edge goes to the house.
Chess is a game of skill, would you sit down and wager against the best chess player in the world....no way, he has an edge over you. Would you bet Mike Trout you could hit a baseball farther than him? Challenge Tiger Woods to a game of golf?
It's like the example of crossing the street...your edge is to look both ways before crossing, this increases your odds of that outcome being "profitable", blindly walk accross, odds go way down
  • #16,153
  • May 28, 2023 10:53am May 28, 2023 10:53am
Quote
gambling, the betting or staking of something of value, with consciousness of risk and hope of gain, on the outcome of a game, a contest, or an uncertain event whose result may be determined by chance or accident or have an unexpected result by reason of the bettor's miscalculation." Trading is gabling no different than the farmer growing 1000 acs of wheat.

Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Absolutely correct in the definition of gambling. What a great post.
IDK if farming or "anything" can be lumped in as a gamble just by the definition he provided. One can dumb down virtually anything to rationalize the absurd. Successful farmers are not "betting" or "staking" farm production. One doesn't hedge risk by driving a car either. To think so is absurd af.
Trade with confidence, trade without fear.
  • #16,154
  • May 28, 2023 3:48pm May 28, 2023 3:48pm
The question didn't make sense, but I wanted some tips from those who have already passed the test of these prop companies.
Quoting Aussi
{quote} nos mostra que você não consegue ler,,,, o tópico porque as respostas estão lá
  • #16,155
  • May 28, 2023 4:16pm May 28, 2023 4:16pm
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Does this mean it could be (statistically speaking) a bit more safe than other new companies ? What's your opinion ?
The legend owner of fxpig is not there anymore. It used to be an amazing company, now its an ex boston technologies boiler room operator.
  • #16,156
  • May 28, 2023 5:19pm May 28, 2023 5:19pm
Quoting Cryptosurf
IDK if farming or "anything" can be lumped in as a gamble just by the definition he provided. One can dumb down virtually anything to rationalize the absurd. Successful farmers are not "betting" or "staking" farm production. One doesn't hedge risk by driving a car either. To think so is absurd af.
-Agreed. It is just semantics. When you simplify things that way, then anything and everything could be considered a gamble or a risk. The thing that sets it apart, and why we do not consider everything to be gambling, are the odds.

When you know your odds, and you know that your odds are favorable, then it is no longer gambling. That being said, there are still a lot of traders that are gambling.
  • #16,157
  • May 29, 2023 12:40am May 29, 2023 12:40am
If one ignores the definition. Anything can be dumbed down to ones opinion. At that point one has to ignore the definition. If one person does it, its gambling. Because that person does not own the skill you have. I get it. You can look both ways. Walk across the street, and not get hit by a car. The risk is minimal. Most of us are professional street crosses. But there seems to be unlucky guy so often who gets hit by a car. Mulled be a pack of dogs, or shot in a drive by. The risk sometimes can be minimal. But there is always risk. Show me a very successful trader. That trades the best system in the world. One that makes 100% week in and week out. For months and longer. And I will show you a liar. Because there is always risk, and risk is a gamble. If you want to change the definition. Well there is always that.
those who can, do. those who cant, talk about those who can
  • #16,158
  • May 29, 2023 12:50am May 29, 2023 12:50am
Quoting gatorinla
If one ignores the definition. Anything can be dumbed down to ones opinion. At that point one has to ignore the definition.
-Not really. This is why we have colloquial usage. Language evolves, along with meaning. This is also why, if you ask, most people will tell you that walking across the street is not considered a gamble.

Quoting gatorinla
Walk across the street, and not get hit by a car. The risk is minimal. ... Show me a very successful trader. That trades the best system in the world. One that makes 100% week in and week out. For months and longer. And I will show you a liar. Because there is always risk, and risk is a gamble.
-Just because something carries with it risk does not make it a gamble. Similarly, you cannot equate risk with luck (or bad luck etc.).
  • #16,159
  • May 29, 2023 4:18am May 29, 2023 4:18am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Absolutely correct in the definition of gambling. What a great post. You have listed things with varying degrees of risk, in others words, not all "gambling" is the same. I personally believe, anything in which you have an edge, although gambling by defintion, is not truly gambling. Trading is one of them. The lottery is not. Poker is. Casino games are not. In other words, you can gamble on games of skill or games of chance. Of course, the games of skill require a large sample size to prove the edge. A good trader can lose any one trade,...

sole reason I switched from poker to trading was scalability. Online poker market got smaller and the field got tougher over the years. Requires much harder work than trading and it is not that scalable.
  • #16,160
  • May 29, 2023 5:11am May 29, 2023 5:11am
Quoting Nsak3y
{quote}-Not really. This is why we have colloquial usage. Language evolves, along with meaning. This is also why, if you ask, most people will tell you that walking across the street is not considered a gamble. {quote}-Just because something carries with it risk does not make it a gamble. Similarly, you cannot equate risk with luck (or bad luck etc.).
As soon as the language evolves from today's wording. Let me know. 550 years ago, most in Europe would of bet/gambled the world was flat. Their opinion didnt change fact. It never does, it wont today.
those who can, do. those who cant, talk about those who can
141 traders viewing now