NFA bans locking from 15 May 2009 - page 39
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
Who says I don't want to? I have a special Expert Advisor for this purpose ready for a long time - Expert Advisor for opening a position at a given price.
Only now many other EAs have suffered - those that have put two pendants at the same time. We have to rewrite them.And not only them... If you want to put two bots in your work, the interaction will also have to be changed... i.e. you have to put two bots in one code.
Кто нибудь без мудрствования скажет!!! Можно ставить встречные или нет??? Если да, то прикаких условиях???
gorby777 wrote :>>
You can. But with stops and according to the system. In order to sleep well.
Sorry, didn't read the whole thread, this InterbankFX quote is obviously known to all:
If you get "Trading is disabled", "Trading is not allowed" or "Not enough money" you may be trying to place a hedge. Hedging is no longer allowed at IBFX due to the new NFA Compliance Rule 2-43.
If you are in a buy you cannot put in a sell pending order or sell market order in the same pair and the opposite is true with a sell.
IBFX
I.e. now it is not possible to place two pending buy and sell orders on Interbank FX Trader 4 platform. Anyone can try this on the demo, and when trying to send an order in the opposite direction, they will get (I checked with build 223) "Trading is disabled". Moreover, even if there is not a single open order! Of course, we will not like this kind of limitation of orders. Normal trading platforms have not yet had such a severe limitation. Most likely, the situation will have to be fixed in the new build, or IBFX will start losing clients en masse and move to another platform.
I think metaquotes will now find themselves pinned to the wall and will have to urgently discard the whole idea of MT lots and individual orders, the move to net positions on the instrument is inevitable, with program support changing as well.
The problem here is not that it's difficult to get around such a restriction, it's a matter of convenience. If you think about it that way, you could still use stones to hammer iron. Nevertheless, all normal people use a hammer and nails, although the result is about the same.
With such an approach, one could not even write MQL4 at all. The programmers with some programming skills can write a robot in any other language and use API functions to press Buy and Sell buttons. But still there is MQL4 in which EAs, indicators and scripts are written. The reason is that it's easier, less time-consuming, less work, less problems with debugging.
The problem here is not that it's difficult to get around such a restriction, it's a matter of convenience. If you think about it that way, you could still use stones to hammer iron. Nevertheless, all normal people use hammer and nails, although the result is about the same.
The best and easiest way around the restriction is to get off either the broker or the platform. Real trading only knows the aggregate position in the account for each instrument. This, of course, does not preclude a tricky API to track the time stats on the account. Let's say the aggregate position is a function of the lot value (+, 0, -) from time. The number of trades (apart from obvious spam) should not limit trading (as now, when there are a lot of obviously artificial restrictions - how many orders can be opened, how to calculate margin on lots, etc.).
The problem here is not that it is difficult to circumvent such a restriction, it is a matter of convenience. If you reason like that, you can stone the iron as before. Nevertheless, all normal people use a hammer and nails, though the result is about the same.
How about looking at United Kingdom, for example?
There are at least two sane dealings there, Alpari and ODL.
(The latter is more interesting...).
And some of the branded ex-USA are moving to Europe...
*
I think that the metaquotes will now find themselves pinned to the wall and will have to urgently discard the whole idea of MT lots and individual orders, the transition to net positions on the instrument is inevitable, and the program support will also change.
So... Look at the "new" ideology of the MT5 platform.
So with the release into the real world, the anti-lockers can breathe easy and keep working.
)))
And those who actually need a lock, will continue to use MT4 and (maybe) quietly envy the new possibilities of MT5.
*
What are the reasons? The only country that poses itself as the centre of the universe?
That's no reason to pass judgement... Of the couple hundred or so forex dealers that have been registered with the NFA.
as a result of the regulator's recent moves there are about 18 left !
Some have left the market selling their customer base to their former competitors, others, like ODL have transferred to their home country
Leaving U.S. residents at home... (boiling in their own juices ... )))
So these are not the numbers to make a global judgement on the collapse of lot platforms, for it's not just about MT.
The best and easiest way to get around the restriction is to get away from either the broker or the platform.
Yes, I've been hearing all over the place about 'foot voting' technology. But... maybe it's time to get to work instead of running back and forth.
You can change everything - broker, platform, even change the planet ;). But what we will reach and the main thing - WHEN and WHERE?
Yes, I've been hearing all over the place about 'foot voting' technology. But... maybe it's time to get to work instead of running back and forth?
You can change everything - broker, platform, you can even change the planet ;). But what we will reach and most importantly - WHEN and WHERE?
Well, if the job is to write scripts for the client, there should be no less work now :)
And if we achieve something and, perhaps, even the main thing, it's nothing - coding a system is much easier than creating a stable and profitable one. IMHO the platform should be chosen based on the robustness criterion, the rest is a matter of technique.
Yes, I've been hearing all over the place about 'foot voting' technology. But... maybe it's time to get to work instead of running back and forth.
You can change everything - broker, platform, even change the planet;) But what will be the result? But what we will reach and the main thing - WHEN and WHERE?
Internal balance. Now. There.
;)
There is, alas, no way round it... (>> no one in person.)
Yeah, a lot of profiteers say the phone's enough for them,
but they don't care what the sell or buy buttons look like...
To be honest with you, I don't believe them. They are lying. Definitely.
For there is always something, including platforms and trading conditions where they are like fish in water.
A little step to the side ... and that's it, we're floating ... )))
*
Runs, by the way, happen for a variety of reasons...
The abolition of instruments, changes in trading conditions, the introduction of five digits at last!
There are many things... you can't be immune to it...
*
It's a different story when, as they say, "I`ve got addicted to dealing".
Well, then all we have to do is to be patient... and work... I don't see any other way out.
There's no way around it... (to no one personally!!!)
It's different when, as the saying goes: "I've got my heart set on dealing".
In that case you just have to be patient... and work... I don't see any other way out.
The problem of changing dealing is not that simple, as there are not many reliable dealing companies. Added to that is the important problem of input and output (each geographical location has different ways of reducing costs). So we often have only two or three (and that's in the best case!) suitable brokerage companies. And if you have already moved from one or two, where do you want to go? Don't even talk about switching platforms...
The problem of dealing is not that simple, because there are not so many reliable dealing companies. Additionally, there is the problem of deposit and withdrawal (every geographical location has its own ways of reducing costs). So we often have only two or three (and that's in the best case!) suitable brokerage companies. And if you have already moved from one or two, where do you want to go? About the change of the platform I am even silent...
Well, some of them have already been cited...
Moreover, 'degree of reliability' is a somewhat abstract thing...
Rather the level of regulation, like in the UK.
(The company was one of the sponsors of the championship by the way...)
*
If you look deeper, the "degree of fuss" in the event of "what" is practically the same for the russians
whether you're dealing in the US or England...
It is the same with bank transfers, for sure the way will be through the same bank account in the U.S..
Or different ones, but the difference in percentages is not that big a difference that you should pay attention to...
(opinion of course personal and subjective...)