Prop Firm Hub | Page 884 | 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

  • #17,661
  • Jul 11, 2023 11:45am Jul 11, 2023 11:45am
Quoting CableJ
{quote} @ 1% risk per trade, I would typically have 4 or 5 months a year that could pass MFF (>8%) and 3 maybe 4 months that could pass FTMO/TFF/TFT (>10%) phase 1s. The other months would end up slightly negative months blowing the challenge or require tons of extensions/retakes until I ran into 1 of the >8%/>10% months. @ 2% risk per trade I can turn my >4%/>5% months into phase 1 winners. We all know what the game is. In most circumstances, you MUST gamble to pass 30d phase 1s.
What you described is basically the market cycles that exist. So your trading works when certain conditions are met and doesn't/breaks even/ doesnt have enough alpha in other conditions. By changing parameters of a prop firm to cater to this, you are essentially fitting the prop firm to the strategy. You can do the exact same thing in the opposite direction given that live accounts have no time restrictions. You only pass prop firm accounts when the market fits your strategy. I believe a bunch of the ICT guys have been promoting this on youtube already. When you see a set up, you buy the prop account just before you take the trade or something along those lines, smart for ICT guys.

If you look at the 7-8 months a year where you cannot pass, if the first 8 months of the cycle is that period, regardless of timelimit its likely you will still fail the prop firm account as if the account goes into drawdown you would start to rely more on luck to get yourself out of the rut. If its a case of a break even most months, then most prop firms with time limits offer resets which is essentially the same thing as extra time if the account is break even.

Its all very chicken and egg because if you are trading at a prop, the first thing you want - after your own success of course - is to make sure that prop firm is liquid so that when you do make money you get paid. If the conditions are too easy, that becomes less likely.
  • #17,662
  • Jul 11, 2023 12:01pm Jul 11, 2023 12:01pm
I personally don't believe in the viability of unlimited props. Even with a high sharpe ratio system, with the time limited evals I still lose challenges 35% of the time and feed the beast. With unlimited time, I would simply reduce risk and never lose a challenge, good traders would be nothing but added risk for unlimited firms b booking & 100% paying out from fees.
  • #17,663
  • Jul 11, 2023 12:14pm Jul 11, 2023 12:14pm
Quoting beastwork
{quote} The 20% comment is not the point I was making. Stay focused. Extracting 10% from the market, on demand is just not realistic. It's doable but not sustainable for the vast majority of profitable traders. Unless you can point me to average market returns greater than 20%, I am objectively NOT better off investing. 20% is the low mark for me. You've jumped to a conclusion, with limited information.
well u gave limited information dude. anyhow, 20% a year is only worth it imo if u have a personal account with atleast a couple millions in it, then yes. otherwise that s nonsence atleast from my point of view. depending on 1s market aproach, if it s more risk adverse or more conservative, it s ofcourse possible to make 10 or 20% in a month. heck, u could do that just in 1 day if the right trade comes along and keeping the risk on the table always at 1%. sure, some months are better some are slower, (rangy/accumulating or distributing) but it s more then doable. trade management and risk management are crucial. and if we talk about a personal account, if i was swing trading still 20% per year is kinda low unless the account is solid enough to make the time investing in it worth it.
as per these challenges, i risk 0.5% initially to make a cushion of 2% and then go with 1% from there. i do the same in funded account. and if i m in DD below initial starting balance i only trade 0.5% till i get above initial balance. atleast that s what i ve seen works best for me without losing 2 much time 2 pass a challenge and to not feel like i m winging it. ofc it all comes down to how u trade and how u manage the trades, there s also the emotional component which could scale the things in ur favor during worse market conditions if u trust what u r doing. there isn t 1 stile fits all in the trading department imo. now, people are different, will see things and aproach things different and that s ok. this is just how i see things and why i replied like that to the limited info u provided.
cheers
  • #17,664
  • Jul 11, 2023 12:15pm Jul 11, 2023 12:15pm
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} It's really 100%, not 10%, as your actual account is MAX LOSS, not equity. Some are 80% (8% target, 10% DD), MFF is 67% (8/12) If you normally risk, say, 5% per trade, you are certainly not risking 5% of the equity in a prop.....you'd be done in one trade.
I've never quite got on board with this math. As you said, this restriction is only a real restriction if you are a person that risks 5% on a trade. Hence the 5% limit will change nothing about the way I trade. In my brain the math is most relevant to our yolo trading friends.

I trade mainly on the Daily charts so this will be an interesting experiment for me, to shrink down my trading style to the H4/H1 charts, to increase my trade frequency, and increase my leverage usage.
  • #17,665
  • Jul 11, 2023 12:27pm Jul 11, 2023 12:27pm
Quoting CableJ
I personally don't believe in the viability of unlimited props. Even with a high sharpe ratio system, with the time limited evals I still lose challenges 35% of the time and feed the beast. With unlimited time, I would simply reduce risk and never lose a challenge, good traders would be nothing but added risk for unlimited firms b booking & 100% paying out from fees.
I guess unlimited challenges produce more reliable funded traders then the gamble challenges, thus making it easier to identify good traders to A-Book from.
  • #17,666
  • Jul 11, 2023 12:29pm Jul 11, 2023 12:29pm
Quoting 1odi
{quote} well u gave limited information dude. anyhow, 20% a year is only worth it imo if u have a personal account with atleast a couple millions in it, then yes. otherwise that s nonsence atleast from my point of view.
What I said was "when I started trading". My personal targets have changed since then. 20% is low only if you think it's low. 20% a year is the MINIMUM I would personally accept as a trader. If I couldn't get 20%/year I would find something else to do with my time. I do prefer conservatism in my trading. I don't have to suffer through massive drawdowns.
  • #17,667
  • Jul 11, 2023 2:37pm Jul 11, 2023 2:37pm
Quoting beastwork
I've never quite got on board with this math.
-This is the reality, my friend. Most firms expect at least 100% return across the challenge/verification phases.
  • #17,668
  • Jul 11, 2023 2:37pm Jul 11, 2023 2:37pm
Quoting juri93
I guess unlimited challenges produce more reliable funded traders then the gamble challenges, thus making it easier to identify good traders to A-Book from.
-I suspect that most firms are not actually interested in A-booking traders. I believe that many of the firms that are offering unlimited challenges are also partnered with 8-cap. CEO of TFTP has stated that moving traders to their A-book has not been profitable for them.
  • #17,669
  • Jul 11, 2023 4:45pm Jul 11, 2023 4:45pm
I really think we traders need to unite in a way that when a prop firm is presented and proved to be scam that we collectively join to report them to authorities, and spread the word online.

The "propfirm" telegram group used to be a "semi" non partial group in which one could raise their concerns about mischevious props. But now , by the infinite wisdom of the admins there they decided to elevate the CEO's of all props to "admins". So if you dare to speak out about any prop firm, the CEO can ban you. Now isnt that nice?

I have a clear cut case of Blueguardian banning because of alleged reverse trading without any evidence whatsoever presented.

Some propfirms really need to be put in place.

I really hope the US/EU comes down clamming this entire space with some hardcore regulation just like they did with BinaryOptions.
  • #17,670
  • Jul 11, 2023 5:11pm Jul 11, 2023 5:11pm
The obvious problem with reporting to 'authorities' and implementing hardcore regulation, is that it will likely end up with large groups of traders becoming geographically blacklisted, and/or, with remote props shuttering entirely. There is always the possibility of props relocating to jurisdictional safe-havens, but then what would be the point of reporting and regulating?

Traders joining together to blacklist/boycott scam firms is definitely the way to go. But this should be done via sites like this, telegram/discord groups and the various review sites that are available etc., and not via the aforementioned methods of reporting. Just my opinion.
  • #17,671
  • Jul 11, 2023 5:46pm Jul 11, 2023 5:46pm
Quoting Takisd
{quote} What is raw spread to you? Other than a retailers marketing strategy. You want a spread with a 0.01 at top of book all the time holding spread? Or you want something you can execute a decent size trade on?
i mean just something with very low spread maybe 1-2 most of the time.
  • #17,672
  • Jul 11, 2023 5:58pm Jul 11, 2023 5:58pm
Quoting Nsak3y
The obvious problem with reporting to 'authorities' and implementing hardcore regulation, is that it will likely end up with large groups of traders becoming geographically blacklisted, and/or, with remote props shuttering entirely. There is always the possibility of props relocating to jurisdictional safe-havens, but then what would be the point of reporting and regulating? Traders joining together to blacklist/boycott scam firms is definitely the way to go. But this should be done via sites like this, telegram/discord groups and the various review...
Yes mass reporting is a recipe for disaster.
  • #17,673
  • Jul 11, 2023 6:36pm Jul 11, 2023 6:36pm
Quoting OranJuice
I really think we traders need to unite in a way that when a prop firm is presented and proved to be scam that we collectively join to report them to authorities, and spread the word online. The "propfirm" telegram group used to be a "semi" non partial group in which one could raise their concerns about mischevious props. But now , by the infinite wisdom of the admins there they decided to elevate the CEO's of all props to "admins". So if you dare to speak out about any prop firm, the CEO can ban you. Now isnt that nice? I have a clear cut case...
Sure.....if you want to lose the incredible opportunity the good ones offer. Regulators "regulate" things that don't know shit about. It will be a blanket approach which will impact ALL FIRMS, not isolated to the scams. It is very simple.......DON'T USE THE SCAMS. I have repeated this over and over and over.....there are enough of us in this thread using and getting paid by the reputable firms. There are 1, maybe 2 folks maxed with MFF and FTMO, once you acccomplish this....maybe E8, TFF, even TFTP (they pay and they are fair). Other than these firms, why the F$%*&@ is anyone using any other firm???????
  • #17,674
  • Jul 12, 2023 12:52am Jul 12, 2023 12:52am
Quoting OranJuice
I really think we traders need to unite in a way that when a prop firm is presented and proved to be scam that we collectively join to report them to authorities, and spread the word online. The "propfirm" telegram group used to be a "semi" non partial group in which one could raise their concerns about mischevious props. But now , by the infinite wisdom of the admins there they decided to elevate the CEO's of all props to "admins". So if you dare to speak out about any prop firm, the CEO can ban you. Now isnt that nice? I have a clear cut case...
Unfortunately if regulation comes it will destroy the industry because that's what governments always do. It happened in Poker in US (and other European countries) and it happens in American ETFs, such as SPY and TLT, which can't be bought by Europeans to "protect people".

Easy to imagine that if regulation comes will demand one hundred financial obligations that most of prop won't be able to respect, moving them offshore or preventing new ones from appearing, and could well be that regulation demands people to pass some exams before working in financial area, like the Pearson in UK, Series 56 in US, etc.

I prefer a cowboys industry than a regulated one.
  • #17,675
  • Jul 12, 2023 2:33am Jul 12, 2023 2:33am
Quoting Capablanca
{quote} Unfortunately if regulation comes it will destroy the industry because that's what governments always do. It happened in Poker in US (and other European countries) and it happens in American ETFs, such as SPY and TLT, which can't be bought by Europeans to "protect people". Easy to imagine that if regulation comes will demand one hundred financial obligations that most of prop won't be able to respect, moving them offshore or preventing new ones from appearing, and could well be that regulation demands people to pass some exams before working...
Valid points.

I think still though we should publicly out and call out retarded propfirms like BlueGuardian. Blueguardian , as per the case i mentioned, not only suspended without providing evidence of their claims, but they were also surprisingly arrogant about it, and even taunted that we could do nothing about it.

Like thats a whole other level of psycopathy, reminds me of the very mature CEO of bespoke.
  • #17,676
  • Jul 12, 2023 3:01am Jul 12, 2023 3:01am
[quote=OranJuice;14494665]{quote} Valid points. I think still though we should publicly out and call out retarded propfirms like BlueGuardian. Blueguardian , as per the case i mentioned, not only suspended without providing evidence of their claims, but they were also surprisingly arrogant about it, and even taunted that we could do nothing about it. Like thats a whole other level of psycopathy, reminds me of the very mature CEO of bespoke.[/quote

what were u doing trading with such a firm in the first place? like pipmaster keeps repeating, there a few firms that pay and have a solid track record, max out on those and then u can explore. i see people looking for regulation cos they lost a hundred bucks!!!! to be honest, like in most fields, if u don t do ur due diligence first, then u deserve to be scamed. ignorance pays.
  • #17,677
  • Jul 12, 2023 3:02am Jul 12, 2023 3:02am
Quoting OranJuice
{quote} Valid points. I think still though we should publicly out and call out retarded propfirms like BlueGuardian. Blueguardian , as per the case i mentioned, not only suspended without providing evidence of their claims, but they were also surprisingly arrogant about it, and even taunted that we could do nothing about it. Like thats a whole other level of psycopathy, reminds me of the very mature CEO of bespoke.
read maven ceos Twitter. Amazing.
  • #17,678
  • Jul 12, 2023 3:24am Jul 12, 2023 3:24am
Quoting pipmaster77
{quote} Sure.....if you want to lose the incredible opportunity the good ones offer. Regulators "regulate" things that don't know shit about. It will be a blanket approach which will impact ALL FIRMS, not isolated to the scams. It is very simple.......DON'T USE THE SCAMS. I have repeated this over and over and over.....there are enough of us in this thread using and getting paid by the reputable firms. There are 1, maybe 2 folks maxed with MFF and FTMO, once you acccomplish this....maybe E8, TFF, even TFTP (they pay and they are fair). Other than...
it reminds me of a situation when CySEC went to regulate binary options without a clue about that industry

eventually it was just an EU-wide blanket ban
  • #17,679
  • Jul 12, 2023 9:01am Jul 12, 2023 9:01am
If we could just get regulators to take out eightcap and leave everyone else alone that would eliminate alot of the problematic firms, but that is not reality. Regulators are currently pre-occupied with eliminating the competition for upcoming CBDC's. With all the money involved and social media foolishness by both traders & props going on, the props firms will likely be the next target.
  • #17,680
  • Edited 9:28am Jul 12, 2023 9:15am | Edited 9:28am
Quoting CableJ
If we could just get regulators to take out eightcap and leave everyone else alone that would eliminate alot of the problematic firms, but that is not reality. Regulators are currently pre-occupied with eliminating the competition for upcoming CBDC's. With all the money involved and social media foolishness by both traders & props going on, the props firms will likely be the next target.
Yeah....CBDC's.....another power grab by the socialist/ democratic government(s) ruining most countries. I do not believe the masses understand the disasterous impact this will have on life as we know it. Not going to rant about it here, but folks need to wake the fuck up as to what is really going on in this country and the world. In a nutshell, they are looking to strip every freedom you have, control everything you do and own, and there is not a thing you can do about it.
But, hey, atleast we don't have mean tweets, we have 50+ genders and a wide open border. Next thing, only the criminals who have been arrested and released 6 times will be the only ones carrying guns.....yeah, it's going to get real good around here if people aren't more careful how they vote.
Great idea if we could just eliminate all firms not willing to put the resources into their own feed. Not just 8cap, although that would eliminate 90%+.
109 traders viewing now, 1 is registered:
ckart