TST/OneUp/LeeLoo/Earn2Trade - futures io
futures io



TST/OneUp/LeeLoo/Earn2Trade


Discussion in Trading Reviews and Vendors

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one EminiTraderCBOT with 23 posts (4 thanks)
    2. looks_two matthew28 with 12 posts (30 thanks)
    3. looks_3 bobwest with 11 posts (47 thanks)
    4. looks_4 Howard Roark with 9 posts (5 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one cdnftrstdr with 5.7 thanks per post
    2. looks_two bobwest with 4.3 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 Merkd1904 with 3.2 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 matthew28 with 2.5 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 27,261 views
    2. thumb_up 248 thanks given
    3. group 41 followers
    1. forum 133 posts
    2. attach_file 7 attachments




Welcome to futures io: the largest futures trading community on the planet, with well over 150,000 members
  • Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
  • Quality education from leading professional traders
  • We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
  • We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community.  It's free and simple.

-- Big Mike, Site Administrator

(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)

 
Search this Thread
 

TST/OneUp/LeeLoo/Earn2Trade

(login for full post details)
  #131 (permalink)
 bobwest 
Site Moderator
Sarasota FL
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Sierra Chart
Trading: ES, YM
 
bobwest's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,439 since Jan 2013
Thanks: 54,253 given, 24,667 received


anubis View Post
3. Have traders fail faster


The bottom line of these business is the 90% of traders that fail. In fact they are so sure that you'll fail that they give you a sim account even after you pass the evaluation.

We are told that about 90% of all new traders fail, when they are trading their own accounts. Why would it be a surprise that the same group of traders fail at the same rate when they try for a funded account?

There is a variety of blame-shifting that we often see, where responsibility for not trading successfully in one of these things is attributed to the rules and not to the fact that the trader lost more than the rules allow. I think that if the rules allowed more losses, the losing traders would in the main just lose more, until they hit the new limits.

If a trader doesn't find the rules to be suitable for his/her trading, which certainly is possible, then the best thing is to just walk away and try something else. But the statistics for traders dropping out of funding evaluations are not terribly different from statistics of traders losing their own accounts.

I don't mean to be harsh, and I have had my share of trading failures also. But if traders do not accept that they took the trades that lost them money, and figure out what to do instead, progress will be slow. Even if a rule is a bad rule, the trader did read it and did decide to trade under it.

Continual complaining about how someone else is responsible does not advance anything, and does not make anyone any better. If someone does not want to trade these kinds of evaluations, then they should find something else. There is always just trading the micros with very small positions, which probably is a better idea anyway, since there is real money at stake in the real market.

My concern is that people who are looking to it being someone else's fault are not looking where they need to look in order to improve. By all means, if someone finds the rules of a funding company to not suit them, they should leave, and quickly. But finding the cause of anyone's lack of trading success in someone else's rules is not going to move anything forward.

The trader who looks to what he/she is doing will be better able to fix it.

Bob.

When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote
Reply With Quote
The following 8 users say Thank You to bobwest for this post:

Can you help answer these questions
from other members on futures io?
TradeStation Order Execution Networks stop server
TradeStation
Daily systems newbie problems
MultiCharts
 
 
(login for full post details)
  #132 (permalink)
 matthew28 
Legendary Elite_Member
United Kingdom
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: Bookmap
Trading: US Equity Index Futures
 
matthew28's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,214 since Sep 2013
Thanks: 3,266 given, 2,423 received


bobwest View Post
[P]eople who are looking to it being someone else's fault are not looking where they need to look in order to improve. By all means, if someone finds the rules of a funding company to not suit them, they should leave, and quickly. But finding the cause of anyone's lack of trading success in someone else's rules is not going to move anything forward.

This and the rest of the post. Not everything is a conspiracy against the little retail trader. The majority of the time they fail because they aren't good enough at that moment.
Some will work on improving and others won't and will simply blame somebody/something else. A high percentage won't be successful, but it will be very few that haven't made it due to anything other than their own choices or failings.

You do not win as a trader, you just get to play again the next day. If that game doesn’t appeal to you then you should not trade. Gary Norden
Visit my futures io Trade Journal Reply With Quote
The following 4 users say Thank You to matthew28 for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #133 (permalink)
 anubis 
Montevideo Uruguay
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: Sierra Chart / Jigsaw
Trading: futures
 
Posts: 51 since Jul 2020
Thanks: 18 given, 36 received


If they really cared about funding traders they would:

- connect you with pro traders for daily or at least weekly mentoring
- because pro traders time is expensive, have a way higher monthly fee, it should be $500 o $1k easily
- at least 6 months of evaluation period, the 20 days period is laughable, not even close to get a statistically significant idea of a trader's expectancy
- no trailing drawdown, a trader with a yearly positive expectancy will hit a trailing drawdown from time to time, it is almost statistically impossible not hit it

Lowering so much the barrier of entry to one of the most difficult disciplines in the world should be illegal.

Reply With Quote
The following 3 users say Thank You to anubis for this post:
 
(login for full post details)
  #134 (permalink)
 bobwest 
Site Moderator
Sarasota FL
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Sierra Chart
Trading: ES, YM
 
bobwest's Avatar
 
Posts: 7,439 since Jan 2013
Thanks: 54,253 given, 24,667 received


anubis View Post
If they really cared about funding traders they would:

- connect you with pro traders for daily or at least weekly mentoring
- because pro traders time is expensive, have a way higher monthly fee, it should be $500 o $1k easily
- at least 6 months of evaluation period, the 20 days period is laughable, not even close to get a statistically significant idea of a trader's expectancy
- no trailing drawdown, a trader with a yearly positive expectancy will hit a trailing drawdown from time to time, it is almost statistically impossible not hit it

Lowering so much the barrier of entry to one of the most difficult disciplines in the world should be illegal.

I would say that if you have a different idea of how a company could do business, that may be completely valid. It might be a better way.

It is also true that a consistently profitable trader will hit a big drawdown at some point, inevitably. Of course, so will a consistently unprofitable one.

It is not wrong to point out how things could be done differently, or even better. Perhaps you should start a company to do this. I don't know if it would succeed commercially, putting out this much effort to train up beginning traders, but it might. Another view would be that after going to this extent to develop traders, it still would face the 90% - 95% failure statistic anyway: it would have traders who went through their program, but unless the attrition rate is severe -- unless they flunked out the ones who didn't get it -- they would not have a high percentage of profitable traders in the end. Essentially, they would have traders who had spent a lot of money and still not changed much. But hope springs eternal, and maybe that enterprise would be successful. The size of the effort would be large in terms of the amount of resources put toward it, as would the cost. It certainly would be different.

So if your criticism is that the existing companies don't do anything much to develop their customers as traders, that should be obvious. They aren't trying to. If you succeed as a trader with them, it's because you were already a good trader, but you just were short of cash (how this would happen is another matter, but it could happen), or you were able to benefit from the external enforcement of rules, or you were a very good learner, mostly on your own.

A trader who does well in these programs will be a statistical outlier. The rest will face the 90% rule, or whatever it actually is.

I believe that traders do not go into these programs with their eyes as open as they need to be. Generally, from reading their accounts of their experiences, they have the same unrealistic ideas of their trading expertise that we all do when starting out, and soon reality intrudes. Then the complaints about the unfairness tend to come in. This exact same phenomenon is seen again and again from traders who never try their hand at getting funded, but just flame out on their own, in their own accounts, and are convinced that "someone" is out to get them, that the markets are rigged, specifically against them, or whatever. It's never that they don't trade well enough, or that they need to change something. This just means that they don't have an avenue for improvement, because they aren't going to look at what they need to change.

I don't care one way or another about these funding companies, and I wish anyone well who tries them out. There are successes, which do get reported here. But they aren't as vocal as the ones who do not succeed, and of course, there are many fewer successes than failures. This is in the nature of trading. Mostly, people simply run into the same emotional issues, loss control issues, risk control issues, overtrading issues, and just plain no-edge issues that we see anywhere, with the same outcomes.

I can't be negative toward those who are honestly trying, but not succeeding. The fact is that this is the road every beginning trader is on, and some who have been around for some time and are still plugging. This is not changed if they choose to enter a funding program.

But both the over-rosy, "I'm going to be a millionaire" belief and the "It's not my fault, they did it to me" belief are delusional, and will hold a trader back. If you can get something out of these programs, do it. If not, don't. Complaints about them are just wasting time.

Bob.

When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote
Reply With Quote
The following 6 users say Thank You to bobwest for this post:


futures io Trading Community Trading Reviews and Vendors > TST/OneUp/LeeLoo/Earn2Trade


Last Updated on July 3, 2022


Upcoming Webinars and Events
 

NinjaTrader Indicator Challenge!

Ongoing
     



Copyright © 2022 by futures io, s.a., Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, Ph: +507 833-9432 (Panama and Intl), +1 888-312-3001 (USA and Canada), info@futures.io
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
no new posts