Best Thread Capital Spreads

[capitalspreads]

pippin

we will add any (liquid) US stock you wish for . It is just that there are thousands of stocks and (in reality) very little interest from our clients even in the big ones that we quote. We currently quote 203 different US stocks and as you can imagine these are (in general) the biggest stocks. At the moment we have positions in just 40 of them as opposed to the fact that we have client positions in all 350 of the FTSE 350.

If you want a particular stock just e-mail our cust services and they will look into it.

Simon

 

[gle101]

Does anybody on this board have any viewpoint on how CS weights the FTSE Rolling daily? It doesn't seem to move according to the future, it is much more stable and does not reflect the acctual movement of the future as it varies between 1-2 spreads.

 

[Phil Mibbutz]

I know we jest about spreadbetting outfits being shonky sometimes, but Finspreads really are the pits - It's not just the unexpected gapping, site down time and poor customer service, but the poor execution and flagrant selectiveness of quote acceptance that did it for me!

Me too. A year or two ago they made a big thing of their superwhizzo New, Improved platform, which turned out to be even worse than the old one. Everything that should happen as quickly as possible happens as slowly as possible, and vice versa. It's a wonder they keep any customers.

 

[capitalspreads]

phil jbat,

Its ok to talk about CS (whether good or bad) but please can we keep the negative comments just on CS as I have no wish to have a slanging match with/about competitors.

thanks guys

simon

 

[capitalspreads]

gle

our computers just take an average mid point of the bid/offer and will not react to every tick because from the bid/offer point of view nothing changes.

ie if the market is at 6350-6351 and the bid trades and the offer trades 5 times each but neither bid nor offer ever actually get removed then whilst the Futures charts will show this continual price action 1 pip up 1pip down etc etc our bid/offer will (of course) never have changed.

As our charts are taken from the Bid side of our price this will have the effect of seeming to smooth our price action as compared to the FTSE futures activity.

If you could look at a chart of the bids (or the offer) on the ftse future it would look more like our chart.

Simon

 

[Jbat001]

phil jbat,

Its ok to talk about CS (whether good or bad) but please can we keep the negative comments just on CS as I have no wish to have a slanging match with/about competitors.

thanks guys

simon

No offence intended - will do

 

[Phil Mibbutz]

phil jbat,

Its ok to talk about CS (whether good or bad) but please can we keep the negative comments just on CS as I have no wish to have a slanging match with/about competitors.

thanks guys

simon

Apologies here, too. To save embarrassment, from now on all abuse directed at other SB companies will be posted on the Fatspreads board.

 

[abobtrader]

Simon, in terms of order filling I must echo an earlier comment that there seems to be a bias that favours filling orders when prices have moved in your favour against when they move in ours. To clarify what I mean, we seem to see more 'price no longer valid' type responses when we the price moves against us, but when the price moves rapidly in your favour, the deal tends to go through (even though we sometimes pray your dealers will have mercy). Basically, your dealers seem to have a skewed tolerance for incorrect prices that favour CS.

Please note, this is not a massive criticism, and I do sometimes see a 'price is no longer valid' response when the price moves against me, but there just seems to be a slight bias. This is probably a function of having dealers and not an automated system with pre-programmed tolerances, and so it may be impossible to get around. I would just ask if you could instruct your dealers to be a little more balanced and reject more tickets that don't put us traders at an immediate disadvantage (or conversely, allow some more of the trades that go the other way). Again, I am still with Capital Spreads, and generally enjoy good service, but this is one area where I see scope for a bit of improvement.

 

[minx]

Dont really think this is a fair complaint. In the real market you dont get filled when the price moves away from the one you want and yet its perfectly simple get filled when it moves against you. Try lifting the bund when the flipper is in there and see how many fills you thought were yours but are now just sitting in the book....

 

[FXSCALPER2]

Dont really think this is a fair complaint. In the real market you dont get filled when the price moves away from the one you want and yet its perfectly simple get filled when it moves against you. Try lifting the bund when the flipper is in there and see how many fills you thought were yours but are now just sitting in the book....

What do you mean? I trade FX with an ECN and, if I use a market order, I get filled whether the price moves in my favour or against me. The point about outfits like Simon's is that there are dealers who check the trades and as such a different expectation is created. The argument, presumably, is that the dealers decide where trades are filled and they have to be fair.

 

[gle101]

Dont really think this is a fair complaint. In the real market you dont get filled when the price moves away from the one you want and yet its perfectly simple get filled when it moves against you. Try lifting the bund when the flipper is in there and see how many fills you thought were yours but are nowfjust sitting in the book....

I do understand your point. However, SB companies do operate on spread as their main source of income. They cannot have it both ways, SB companies do not have an order book as such, and as a trader, you must rely on the prices that they quote as being tradeable. This kind of bias against you (often informed by the SB), might be acceptable during important news releases or when a noticeable delay of quote occurs.

 

[minx]

A market order will get filled at any price. The CS prices aren't for a market order but a limit order, therefore you cant buy at 115.00 if the mkt is now quoting 115.02, hence my comment on the order sitting in the book. For things like bonds, Indices, FX mkt orders are fine but try doing that sort of thing in lumber, meats, cotton and you'll get your ar*e handed to you. I know this from painful experience

 

[minx]

I do understand your point. However, SB companies do operate on spread as their main source of income. They cannot have it both ways, SB companies do not have an order book as such, and as a trader, you must rely on the prices that they quote as being tradeable. This kind of bias against you (often informed by the SB), might be acceptable during important news releases or when a noticeable delay of quote occurs.

You should probably look at it this way: CS are a business and businesses need to make profits. Why would they take a trade from you that makes a loss right from the start? It just doesnt make sense, they'd go bust in the long run. I agree that sometimes its an ar*e but thats life, if 1-2 ticks makes that big a difference to your trading model then DMA is probably better than spreadbetting. I'm not saying its ideal I'm just suggesting you think about it from a realistic point of view.

 

[gle101]

You should probably look at it this way: CS are a business and businesses need to make profits. Why would they take a trade from you that makes a loss right from the start? It just doesnt make sense, they'd go bust in the long run. I agree that sometimes its an ar*e but thats life, if 1-2 ticks makes that big a difference to your trading model then DMA is probably better than spreadbetting. I'm not saying its ideal I'm just suggesting you think about it from a realistic point of view.

The limit order target is touched immediately as you click on the quote given. There might be a very short time delay before the order reaches the server, that in some cases can support what you are saying. The problem for the SB company is probably that, after you have clicked, there might not be enough time to hedge, if there is a major quick sudden movement in your favor. If this happens rarely, it is not a big deal, but if this kind of bias against you is put in action on an ongoing basis, it must be considered as a potential risk. This is an interesting and debatable issue. It would be interesting to hear Simon's viewpoint on this.

 

[capitalspreads]

General Comment

the point about missing trades on adverse market moves will always be with us. As clients demand ever tighter and tighter 'spreads' such that the word 'spread betting' in many markets is becoming a misnomer. In many of the main markets we quote there is virtually no actual profitable spread to play with and we must in certain circumstances be sure about the levels at which trades go through. If i was quoting 5 points wide on GBP/USD then almost every trade would be 'fair' (from my point of view) as the spread would have taken out any posible price variation.

But, as with the real markets it is much easier to buy than sell into a falling market or sell than buy into a rising one. In the real world if you click the trade button to sell your 1 contract of FTSE at 6350 (let us assume that you can see 10 contracts on the bid) if somebody else gets there before you then "sorrreee mate" you've missed the trade and will have to trade at the next price 6349 (if you can get that) and if you miss that then 6348 etc etc.

But if you had put a buy order at the same price 6351 then of course you will be filled there and then as there will always be somebody happy to sell at your bid price.

If you convert this to the spread betting markets you can see the same effect. You will often get filled on an adverse price move because my dealers (being the market makers) are happy to take the trade (as is the case above in the FTSE futures) but if the market moves the other way (especially in times of volatility) they may reject it along the same argument as with the missed price in the example above.

My dealers were feeling very sore about this comment theme as they feel that clients do not appreciate that they work under the same constraints. As an example we had a big sell order in the FTSE and they tried to sell the futures only to miss the price twice (of course they, as with you, are not sure for a few secs as to whether they got the trade which added to the losing move). By the time they got the hedge on the market was 4 points lower and the trade book £2000 worse off. The client still got the trade we got the loss.

This is just 'the markets' .

Of course the advantage my dealers have is that thay can make a 'market' order to basically sell at the best price possible. But in general they do not like doing this. A spread beting client cannot make a 'market order' action.

Our clients can, almost, replicate a 'market' order but only via a new/limit/stop order. In these cases here CS will fill at the first tradable level open to us.



Simon

 

[fxwinner22]

show me a broker that does not slip sometimes and i'll show my **** in Burtons window

 

[gle101]

General Comment

the point about missing trades on adverse market moves will always be with us. As clients demand ever tighter and tighter 'spreads' such that the word 'spread betting' in many markets is becoming a misnomer. In many of the main markets we quote there is virtually no actual profitable spread to play with and we must in certain circumstances be sure about the levels at which trades go through. If i was quoting 5 points wide on GBP/USD then almost every trade would be 'fair' (from my point of view) as the spread would have taken out any posible price variation.

But, as with the real markets it is much easier to buy than sell into a falling market or sell than buy into a rising one. In the real world if you click the trade button to sell your 1 contract of FTSE at 6350 (let us assume that you can see 10 contracts on the bid) if somebody else gets there before you then "sorrreee mate" you've missed the trade and will have to trade at the next price 6349 (if you can get that) and if you miss that then 6348 etc etc.

But if you had put a buy order at the same price 6351 then of course you will be filled there and then as there will always be somebody happy to sell at your bid price.

If you convert this to the spread betting markets you can see the same effect. You will often get filled on an adverse price move because my dealers (being the market makers) are happy to take the trade (as is the case above in the FTSE futures) but if the market moves the other way (especially in times of volatility) they may reject it along the same argument as with the missed price in the example above.

My dealers were feeling very sore about this comment theme as they feel that clients do not appreciate that they work under the same constraints. As an example we had a big sell order in the FTSE and they tried to sell the futures only to miss the price twice (of course they, as with you, are not sure for a few secs as to whether they got the trade which added to the losing move). By the time they got the hedge on the market was 4 points lower and the trade book £2000 worse off. The client still got the trade we got the loss.

This is just 'the markets' .

Of course the advantage my dealers have is that thay can make a 'market' order to basically sell at the best price possible. But in general they do not like doing this. A spread beting client cannot make a 'market order' action.

Our clients can, almost, replicate a 'market' order but only via a new/limit/stop order. In these cases here CS will fill at the first tradable level open to us.



Simon

Thanks Simon for your comment on this subject.

First of all I wish to point out that it is the spread betting company that offers a "tight" spread betting product, and the client who makes a decision to take on that offer if he finds it interesting. It is a mutual agreement between two parties, and both agree to the conditions set forth. Yes I understand, there might be a problem in handling a very tight spread. After introducing a tight spread the spread betting company should not take deliberate dealer action to make that spread more than it actually is. I am in no way saying that CS is any way partaking in such a manipulation of the spread. On the contrary I have found so far while trading the FTSE that CS is giving a swift execution and a fair price. The market for the spread betting industry is changing quickly, it tends to move towards the DMA. A 'fair' price from the traders point of view, is to get the price you are offering in the quote. Every traders knows that there might be some diversion from this general standpoint, but the overall trading experience should be, that you are getting the price quoted.

I honestly don't fully understand your comment on moving markets. From a traders point of view, it doesn't matter at all if you buy in favor of the short term trend. The quote given by the SB should be honoured as genuine. As mentioned before, as you are saying, in an extremely volatile market, there is a diversion from this. In the real market, every trader knows that if you quickly buy on a bid you will get it. I regard the quote given by the SB as a bid price, and from my standpoint a bit should be treated as such. Of course if the price moves before the order has actually reached you, a new price will be quoted. I don't see any contradiction in this at all. The real problem appears when a dealer is waiting to feel where the wind is blowing, and takes advantage of this, and thus, trading against the trader. Again this is not my impression with CS overall, but the trader must be aware of this possibility as the spread is tightening, because this does happen sometimes.

Now a few words on your comment, about your dealers feeling sore about this comment theme. Well Simon, don't forget that the traders hard earned money is also on the line here. Sorry, If your dealers can't view this as balanced and sound discussion, on a board for which subjects like this are brought forth. From a traders point of view this is an important subject to discuss. If good language is used and the tone is good, I really don't understand why they feel sore about it. It is an established fact that at the end of the year, the SB company will have a very good profit. This is not the case with most of the spread betting clients, so it is only natural for the traders to be careful of his/her investment with the spread betting companies.

 

[Jbat001]

General Comment

My dealers were feeling very sore about this comment theme as they feel that clients do not appreciate that they work under the same constraints. As an example we had a big sell order in the FTSE and they tried to sell the futures only to miss the price twice (of course they, as with you, are not sure for a few secs as to whether they got the trade which added to the losing move). By the time they got the hedge on the market was 4 points lower and the trade book £2000 worse off. The client still got the trade we got the loss.

This is just 'the markets' .
Simon

You have clients that you're allowing to go £500/point on the FTSE!?

 

[capitalspreads]

jbat

we have some v big punters ... although our biggest online is just (!!) 300 a pip in one bet.

gle101

but the whole point of my comment is that the market works the same for us as it does for our clients. Sometimes we miss the hedge sometimes clients miss the trade. Given the spreads we quote it is down to the clients skill as to whether he/she makes money. In reality whether you miss a deal by a pip or so should not invalidate the reason for the trade.

in my example our hedge was placed (eventually) even though we were £2K down, we did not wait for a better price we just hit the bid and took the pain. This is the lesson that should be learnt. Not that we got one price or another.

 

[Jbat001]

jbat

we have some v big punters ... although our biggest online is just (!!) 300 a pip in one bet.

gle101

but the whole point of my comment is that the market works the same for us as it does for our clients. Sometimes we miss the hedge sometimes clients miss the trade. Given the spreads we quote it is down to the clients skill as to whether he/she makes money. In reality whether you miss a deal by a pip or so should not invalidate the reason for the trade.

in my example our hedge was placed (eventually) even though we were £2K down, we did not wait for a better price we just hit the bid and took the pain. This is the lesson that should be learnt. Not that we got one price or another.

It was your comment about the £2K that piqued my interest. Two grand divided by 4 points is 500 quid a point, or am I missing something?

Nonetheless, I take your point. Slippage is a pain in the @rse, but a couple of pips shouldn't make a lot of difference if the trade is based on sound research anyway.