if you are using IBKR for futures mainly, then look at the TT FIX Adapter and you can then go with Advantage Futures or any other TT FIX Adapter provider.,, either way you will pay the same $0.20c RT per trans, but what will make a difference will be the provider(FCM) gateway...
In terms of $50k vs $100k account - no real difference in my opinion. What is important is how much you risk. As accounts get smaller & smaller, then it is harder and harder to make a reasonable risk.
There are 2 issues with undercapitalisation.
1) Anyone with $3,$5,$10k who wants to make a living trading is undercapitalised.
2) Anyone, with ANY account balance, who attempts to make 10% per day will blow up.
Now - if 10% from $3k is possible, which some people here are saying. Then let's first figure out how it could be achieved:
1) Many small trades across different markets.
2) A couple of large trades a day.
Option 1 - I gave an example how in stocks this would eat away at you with commissions.
So - please, those proposing option 1, please let us know:
i) What markets would be traded?
ii) What would the typical time in trade be?
iii) How many trades per day?
Option 2 - a couple of large trades per day.
For those proposing option 2, please let us know
i) What markets would be traded
ii) The percentage return you would aim for per trade and the risk you would assume to do that (of course remember that you need to trade on a daily basis)
iii) Win rate
If you do that, I will point out where the size of the account will be overcome with the attempts to make the large return.
In this way, we will scratch the surface and make things a little more scientific.
What's the point arguing about all this stuff if you cage your way of thinking like that. The truth is no matter what people say, you'll ignore it because you have made commitment to your own self that you'll persist no matter what the cost is.
What we are dicussing is definitely what we DO NOT call "normal return rate". IT IS ABNORMAL, hence, you can't use normal way of thinking and trading to achieve that kind of result.
In order to achieve ABNORMAL RESULT, you have to think and trade ABNORMALLY.
Now that you have indulged my curiousity and I feel challenged to attempt this in live trading myself.
It seems that people are happy with an unscientific "is possible" but not with an unscientific "is not possible".
Thus far we have agreed on "10% per day isn't scaleable" - and no-one is asking for scientific evidence of this as it is accepted, although the boundaries of scaleable are yet to be defined. In my opinion - if you turn $3k into $2m in 50 days, it is scaleable.
If we get into the details about hypothetical systems, we can examine the impact of inescapable factors, such as commissions,spreads and time on these systems.
So - why not look into what people think is possible ? which seems to be 10% on a small account. We can examine this and the factors that would impact the performance. Lets narrow down the types of system that could be implemented and look at the roadblocks.
If you would try this for eternity using random entries and exits, there will be some period where you make 10%/day.
But as none of us will trade that long, its rather theoretical (and you would blow up countless accounts, no matter what size).
Is it scalable?
First of all, who really cares as it is (at least practically) impossible?
Anyways... here we go:
If you would achieve 10%/day for 100 days in a row and start with $100,000 you would end up with $1,252,783,000.
So you couldn't play that game for very long anyways!
Why not go with -10%/day? It's much easier!
The following user says Thank You to vvhg for this post: