NFA bans locking from 15 May 2009 - page 10
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
...
2. Split your account with an American broker into two separate accounts with the same volume of funds. In one account all positions for all instruments will be BUY only, and in the other account all positions for all instruments will be SELL only. This rule is not violated when hedging is prohibited for one account, because we have 2 accounts. Then we need a method to distribute trades of the only Expert Advisor among these 2 different accounts. Since I have not faced this problem before, I would like to know what methods are available for accurate execution of orders of one Expert Advisor on 2 different accounts? ....
Maybe, it would be better to divide accounts not into equal parts? Probably better to divide them into main and auxiliary, locking ones. In your case half of the capital will be withdrawn in case of a strong trend. Not profitable. In any case, splitting accounts is not profitable and the NFA has certainly calculated such a breakdown. The best option, in my humble opinion, is to go to Europe. Money's on the table from Monday. American hypocrisy always ends badly.
Maybe divide the accounts not into equal parts? Probably better to divide into a main and an auxiliary, locking account. In your case, if there is a strong trend, half of the capital will be taken out of circulation. Not profitable.
It is dangerous. You can easily get a MC.
And any official explanation is reminiscent of the meaning of the explanation "by popular demand of the workers", which has been widely used in our recent history. You all know very well how trustworthy the Americans are when they occupied Iraq to supposedly destroy weapons of mass destruction which they couldn't even find there. In reality, they needed nothing but oil in Iraq. Roughly the same thing is happening now in terms of imposing a hedging ban on American brokers.
and that anyone believed Iraq had mass weapons :-))), in a backward almost feudal country, nuclear and chemical weapons... ;-) ?
---
But you had to justify the oil trip!
If the americans had said that was the goal, the whole world would have misunderstood them
there was no other goal ...
and the practical Americans wouldn't throw their money away...
the goal was, and it was achieved... the regime they did not like was defeated ...
all this talk of a good cause... ridding the world of the "threat" to the housewives and covering up the real goals...
---
the lock-in ban is probably a mathematical justification
there could be no other logical explanation
what do i care if i'm a broker, how my client is losing or earning
with or without locks
This is dangerous. You could easily get an MC.
You mean on a bigger account in case of a serious miscalculation? With a well thought-out MM this should not happen, and, in this case, you can always react in time and come out with a profit... Although I'm testing my variants now... It turns out that the division of accounts is unprofitable in any case.
In general, I wonder... What's going to happen in the markets after the 15th... What's the big money the americans are insuring against...
It is hard to say. At least the bulk of the "liquidity" pumped into the banks is still lying dormant.
That is, there is plenty of money, but no one is in a hurry to lend. Maybe they will 'push' the banks...
did anyone believe Iraq had mass weapons :-))), in a backward almost feudal country nuclear and chemical weapons... ;-) ?
---
but you had to justify going after the oil!
a little enlightenment:
Contrary to popular belief, Iraq is not just about oil. It is about water and geopolitics. The Tigris and Euphrates rivers flow through Iraq. Iraq is thus the only country in the region that controls crucial sources of water, a demand for which is growing. In the 1980s, the importance of water - both politically and economically - became apparent to those of us who worked in the energy and civil engineering business. In the privatisation race, many of the big companies that had their eye on small independent energy companies were now thinking about privatising water systems in Africa, Latin America and the Middle East.
In addition to oil and water, Iraq's location is also of strategic value. It borders Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Turkey; it owns part of the Persian Gulf coastline. The distance to Israel and to the former Soviet Union can easily be covered by missiles. Military strategists equate Iraq with the Hudson River Valley during the wars with the French and the Indians and during the American Revolution. In the 18th century, the French, the British and the Americans knew: who controls the Hudson Valley controls the continent. Today, everyone knows: whoever controls Iraq holds the key to controlling the Middle East.
On top of that, Iraq represents a vast market for American technology and engineering. The fact that in its depths lies one of the largest oil fields in the world (larger, by some estimates, than Saudi Arabia) would guarantee that Iraq could finance huge programmes of industrialisation and infrastructure development. All the major players - engineering and construction companies; suppliers of computer systems, aircraft, missile and tank manufacturers; pharmaceutical and chemical companies - are all focused on Iraq.
So we're going to measure each other's dicks? I'm knowingly longer, you're knowingly deeper. How does this affect trading?
Once again I will ask you to give me an example of the trading strategy with use of loc which would demonstrate its advantage over a trivial closing.
There are five positions to one side. Pyramiding. No TP. When we're ripe, we open a total position against. And don't get sick of closing all those five individually. Yes, this is a technical feature of MT. But it's better with a lock than without it, isn't it? It would be even better, if instead of entering the lock MT would close those positions manually. But it does not do that. Therefore, now it is better to exit with lock than without it. And how it will be in MT5, we'll see.
And the lock gives me a chance to support my position somewhere and to be psychologically more relaxed.
Which is exactly what I needed to prove. Lock is just psychology.
And the case of two strategies in one account, trading independently (medium and short term), has already been mentioned.
Что и требовалось доказать. Лок - это просто психология.
And the example of two EAs, one of which is a long-term strategy and the other a short-term one, we prefer to ignore?
And the case of having two strategies in the same account, trading independently (medium and short term) has already been mentioned.
Then it's not "just psychology"