Price signals, what will happen to them? - page 17
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
Come on hot guys, let's count the drawdown from the initial deposit ;)
Indeed)
I`m sorry, I`ve misunderstood the offer. You may understand the service here as well. The market is highly dependent on the trader's trading activity and the market is highly dependent on the trader's professionalism and professionalism. Subscribers are dissatisfied and disappointed, the service's reputation is ruined for them, some will leave it irretrievably, and one provider is satisfied because he managed to earn.
First of all, you can continue to work with cent accounts and try to earn by trading.
Second, you can attract subscribers to the free signal to advertise yourself as a good trader. For example, trade for half a year with good profit and moderate drawdown, write in the description that free trade will still be available for six months, who is interested in further cooperation, write in personal. Then you can stop trading and write that on mybook signal with the same name, you can see the continuation of trading. It seems that so far it has not been forbidden. I would like to say, that it is possible to prohibit or restrict free subscription to other online services or PAMM accounts. Or, they introduce a separate rating of signals with cent ones written in large red letters that subscriptions here may be dangerous for your deposit. But at your own risk, you can subscribe for a fee.
I agree with you, it does not make a difference what the hell kind of account is important, what figures a trader does, even if it's just for one year.
I agree with you, it does not make any difference what the hell kind of account is important what indicators a trader has, even if it's just for a year.
+
I'm for example in favour of making all signals paid. I don't care if it's a demo or cent account or not.
If you like the signal, want to download/see the trades history, subscribe and so on (i.e. use the service), then pay for it.The service should be at least somewhat responsible, not a magnet for suckers and the naive. If the service is responsible, there will be signals at the top , which are really worthy of attention , and there will be no shortage of subscribers.
Otherwise, there will be once in five years, randomly promoted CALM and occasional couple thousands of subscribers for half a year - and a cloud of "lost, laughed at" observers.
Let me ask you, are there any signals worthy of consideration right now in your opinion? That you can really pay attention to?
CALM has cleaned up its signal history? https://www.mql5.com/ru/signals/129797
Changing the conditions for cent accounts. No more than N months of history saved. That's probably the result.
Yes, they will be free.
We are gradually improving the service and more interesting options for subscribers are coming.
Good decision, comrades!
This is a strong blow to the scammers who have created cent accounts "to grow" earlier and to the overcompensating $10 traders, trading from the scratch - "I may survive a drawdown".
That is why there is so much yelling and drooling in this thread.
Moreover, we need to further improve the quality of signals.
Subscription costs now min $30, which means that the payback period will be only 3% per month from $1000. Moreover, the rule should be that subscribers must not bear higher risks than signals providers, including in absolute terms. Therefore the next logical step is to create a warning for potential subscribers "This provider has balance less than $1000 and signal may not payback for comparable investments" for those providers whose balance is less than $1000 and whose "Monthly Growth Rate" is lower than 3%. And in $ regardless of account currency.
This will also allow you to separate those providers who are ready to risk their money from those who are ready to risk subscribers' money only, as well as to clean the service from those scammers who migrated from cent accounts to ruble ones.
Good decision, comrades!
A decisive blow to the scammers who have previously created massively cent accounts "to grow", and $10-traders-over-simmers, trading from the mere hope "I may survive a drawdown".
That is why there is so much yelling and drooling in this thread.
Moreover, we need to further improve the quality of signals.
Subscription costs now min $30, which means that the payback period will be only 3% per month from $1000. Moreover, the rule should be that subscribers must not bear higher risks than signals providers, including in absolute terms. Therefore the next logical step is to create a warning for potential subscribers "This provider has balance less than $1000 and signal may not payback for comparable investments" for those providers whose balance is less than $1000 and whose "Monthly Growth Rate" is lower than 3%. And in $ regardless of account currency.
This will also allow us to separate those providers who are willing to risk their money from those who are ready to risk subscribers' money only, as well as to purify the service from those scammers who have migrated from cent accounts to ruble ones.
Everyone has their own trading principles. Who says that the risk should not exceed 3%? Who wants to buy it, who does not? We should not decide what people may or may not do!
Everyone has his own trading principles. Who says the risk should not exceed 3%? Who wants to buy it, who does not? Don't decide for people what they can and cannot do!
You don't quite understand me.
The question is not about the risk in % of an account per trade, but about the possibility of getting the subscriber to make a profit without risking more money than the signal provider himself. If we take it with a margin, it is not even 3% but 5% - it is an indicator of expected average monthly profitability.
You don't quite get my point.
The question here is not about the risk in % of account per trade, but about the subscriber's ability to get the trade to breakeven without risking in general substantially more money than the signal provider itself is risking. If we take it with a margin, it's not even 3% but 5% - it's about the expected average monthly return.
I would never put money into a forex brokerage account, expecting to receive from 3% to 5% per month. First, the cost of input withdrawal. up to 5 percent, payment for the signal... Paying for VPS/ And constantly worrying that the signal provider does not leak. In order there will be always a connection to the server, in order there will be a money transfer from the broker after the deadline. That the Bank of Switzerland doesn't pull any tricks. Even if all this does not happen, you will have less than 10% profit and neurosis.
But the service bans signals with more than 100% profitability per month. The service does not allow them in rating.