Yes this is good news. Hopefully GFT will be a catalyst for other SB's to implement trailing stops. A far more important platform function in my book, is the possibility of setting your own predefined user stop loss level. This has been for a long time no. 1 on my wish list, but it doesn't at the moment look as if CS will grant me this wish.
Best Thread Capital Spreads
shortorlong
Established member
- Messages
- 659
- Likes
- 28
:arrowu: Same here. :arrowu:
lurkerlurker
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,482
- Likes
- 150
FuturesBetting also offer trailing stops through their software, and you can use NinjaTrader for FuturesBetting (which is a platform I understand many DA clients at IB use).
tar
Legendary member
- Messages
- 10,443
- Likes
- 1,314
I have a comment here about capital spreads , i use to bet with binarybet extrabet ladbrokes but i didnt experience betting difficulties with the binaries like capital spreads , sorry to say this but today like last friday like more other days i couldnt close a binary position on the ftse because they put the betting on the phone after i took the bet but i dont have access always to international calls and the price is moving very fast , so i lost the bet after its expired on the other direction . why they do this ? the maximum stake @ the binaries is 10 quid /p , but @ binarybet there is no maximum stake they do 100 quid/p normally and they didnt do this to me .
Another story ; a week ago CS closed a binary position @ the ftse to reversal but i didnt close it yet and after they close it they put the betting on the phone and the ftse do reversal as i have expected !
Ranking ( 0 - 10 ) for the binaries = 3
Another story ; a week ago CS closed a binary position @ the ftse to reversal but i didnt close it yet and after they close it they put the betting on the phone and the ftse do reversal as i have expected !
Ranking ( 0 - 10 ) for the binaries = 3
bond_trader1
Active member
- Messages
- 209
- Likes
- 3
I have a question to ask about a trade I placed with E*Trade. I was long a market - (lets say oil because I would rather not reveal what it actually was) with a stop at 80.50.
I went away from my screen and when I came back I saw that oil had been as low as 80.47 (3 ticks below the stop - not in a spike either but in a normal movement) but I had not been stopped out and the trade has since moved back in my favour. I know sometimes there is a delay in processing the order but if this happened 1 hour and 35 minutes ago, the trade is still in my portfolio, I have received no confirming email and I am able to interact with the trade (e.g. move the stop) is it safe to assume I can keep the position?
I have a dreadful fear that this will suddenly get voided at some point because I am now significantly in profit.
I went away from my screen and when I came back I saw that oil had been as low as 80.47 (3 ticks below the stop - not in a spike either but in a normal movement) but I had not been stopped out and the trade has since moved back in my favour. I know sometimes there is a delay in processing the order but if this happened 1 hour and 35 minutes ago, the trade is still in my portfolio, I have received no confirming email and I am able to interact with the trade (e.g. move the stop) is it safe to assume I can keep the position?
I have a dreadful fear that this will suddenly get voided at some point because I am now significantly in profit.
capitalspreads
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,452
- Likes
- 79
bond-trader
i think that you can rest assured that if a stop has not been activated after an hour or more then you may move the stop to a more favorable level. If for some reason we did look at your account in this kind of depth it would be for some other reason and frankly it would not be good PR to activate stops at such a remote remove. I am not going to say that it could not happen but it is most unlikely. We are unlikely to look at order journals on closed deals that are made at fair prices, so if you are worried that we may go back over an open trade/order jounal trail then just close the existing bet and open it up again with a new bet. (pay away the spread but now be in a totally new trade which will not have a history going back over a missed stop level) sneaky I know but .....
The only rider to this would be if the stop should have been activated overnight but, because of a sharp (but real) shift in the underlying price, the price move from one pip to the next was greater than a certain amount. In this case the systems will look for dealer intervention to check whether the price print was real or not. in the middle of the night there is no dealer to confirm or not. If this happens and your position remains open then moves in your favour you could trade out of it before 06.30 (again at a fair price) when our dealers get in and we will never know that there was a stop to be confirmed as you will have closed the position!
simon
i think that you can rest assured that if a stop has not been activated after an hour or more then you may move the stop to a more favorable level. If for some reason we did look at your account in this kind of depth it would be for some other reason and frankly it would not be good PR to activate stops at such a remote remove. I am not going to say that it could not happen but it is most unlikely. We are unlikely to look at order journals on closed deals that are made at fair prices, so if you are worried that we may go back over an open trade/order jounal trail then just close the existing bet and open it up again with a new bet. (pay away the spread but now be in a totally new trade which will not have a history going back over a missed stop level) sneaky I know but .....
The only rider to this would be if the stop should have been activated overnight but, because of a sharp (but real) shift in the underlying price, the price move from one pip to the next was greater than a certain amount. In this case the systems will look for dealer intervention to check whether the price print was real or not. in the middle of the night there is no dealer to confirm or not. If this happens and your position remains open then moves in your favour you could trade out of it before 06.30 (again at a fair price) when our dealers get in and we will never know that there was a stop to be confirmed as you will have closed the position!
simon
bond_trader1
Active member
- Messages
- 209
- Likes
- 3
Thank you for your reply.
And I would add that I spoke to E*Trade on the phone about the position. They told me that because the market only dipped momentarily beneath my stop (on a long order) and then came back up, it hadn't been triggered. The dealer in charge there made it clear that although they didn't have too, they would continue to let me continue to hold my position which was then around 50 points higher.
I appreciate the decision - this was very good customer service!
And I would add that I spoke to E*Trade on the phone about the position. They told me that because the market only dipped momentarily beneath my stop (on a long order) and then came back up, it hadn't been triggered. The dealer in charge there made it clear that although they didn't have too, they would continue to let me continue to hold my position which was then around 50 points higher.
I appreciate the decision - this was very good customer service!
Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,775
- Likes
- 3,976
HAd my first experiance of Capital Spreads today, Tried to close my Bianry Bet for a £22 profit. It took 30 seconds for the site to tell me the price was no longer vaild, by that time my position was running at a £9 loss!!
charlieauk
I had this experience too a number of times. Very alarming especially when markets falling rapidly.
Even when price seemed to be stationary around my buy level I could not get the order filled. (I don't get this with CMC. Sometimes price gets rejected but not when there is no movement away from the actioned ticket price.
One to watch.
lurkerlurker
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,482
- Likes
- 150
Binaries
Monitoring that situation isn't free mate. Perhaps one not to watch! I understand that in a fast market the price may move on, but in practice it can take a dealer over 20 seconds to fill an order. CS is okay for the more liquid markets when you are on auto fill, but active traders, winners, exotic markets, and binary bets go to dealers, and there is a delay inherent in that. If the market has moved away from your price when you are trying to get out, you just won't be filled. To a large extent this is just how things are with SB, although in my experience CMC are more efficient at getting clients out of positions. My gripe involved a bias in getting into positions, given that the price was correct when I clicked on it, but may have moved in my favour 30 seconds later when a dealer got to it - I would not be filled in those circumstances, but would be filled if the price had moved against me (but was equally invalid as the underlying mid was outside the quoted spread).
Binary bets are a great way to lose money quickly. I do appreciate that there are some who make money, either through dumb luck, arbing between bookies, or through a very clever and complex system which only trades when the strikes line up (and involves hedging). However, for the average punter, the house has too much of an edge in binaries, and the spreads are pretty wide. You have no FSA protection with binaries either - in my view if you are interested in options through spreadbets you should take a look at the short dated options at IG (as they are still spread bets). IG also offer binaries, but I've just given my view on binary betting.
I understand that SB firms do well out of binaries, however it takes up a lot of dealer time due to the nature of binaries - I'd really much prefer if firms scrapped binaries and focused their dealer time on real markets.
Bond_Trader1 - you got stopped out. I agree that it was wrong for their system not to close the trade - I think that is something they should look into with IT. However, you were stopped out. You made a loss on that trade. My advice to you if this happens again would be to get right on the phone and have them close your position at the stop price provided that the market traded enough there that it is reasonable to be stopped at that price. Then, if you still believe you are right, get back into the position.
You could also close the position and simultaneously open a new one as Simon suggests. It is quite right to pay the spread again, as you were stopped out - if you want to be in the market after being stopped out, you need to pay to get back in. In any event, CS should be quite happy to work with you and amend any trades / P&L to reflect the situation as it would have occurred if your stop had been filled correctly. I am sure they will have no problem with doing this.
When I had my account, I can think of a few occasions when my forex stops were missed. Given that I did around half a lot in the forex, it seemed reasonable to assume no slippage in normal market conditions. It is a little disconcerting to see an open loss mounting 10 minutes after you should have been stopped out. What I simply did was give them 10 minutes, and if they had overlooked the stop I'd call in and their dealers would be quite happy to fill this. Naturally they will miss the odd order as they need to check that clients have been stopped at fair levels and this takes time. (and I am quite glad dealers do check the stops given their erratic FX feeds!). I would only call in sooner if I wanted to reopen the position, or if I needed the margin for another trade.
Simon - you are somewhat of an enigma. On one hand, you have an interest in the profitability of CS, and seem to have a fairly genuine intention to keep things "fair". While we may disagree about what fair means in terms of balancing the interests of CS and your clients, I do not doubt your sincerity. On the other hand, you seem reasonably willing to give the odd tip to folk here, and actively encourage them to try and "get a good deal" from CS.
Cases in point (I can't be bothered looking for the exact posts, or quoting you verbatim):
You have told us that if we see a "good deal" with you, we are welcome to take it.
You have told us in detail about your policies on trade checking, and mentioned things your firm would be "unlikely to notice".
You have made suggestions like the one above about closing a stopped out trade manually, realising a profit, and then opening another position to get back into the market. While I accept that a client should be able to open a new position in these cases, suggesting that a client closes out a stopped out trade at a more advantageous price than their stop level because of an IT problem, and being honest about the fact that your staff wouldn't notice this...
I would suggest that clients are less interested in getting a good deal than being treated fairly. You seem to hold the view (to an extent) that punters want to rip you off. I agree that there are a certain portion of people who would only trade on invalid prices. However, you seem a little jaded about the intentions of punters in general. In my view it would be somewhat unfair of a punter to make money out of what was ostensibly a losing position because your dealer missed a stop, and it doesn't seem quite right for you to suggest that they do this.
Ironically, I was one of the punters who would call in to get a missed stop activated, whether the position had come back in my favour or not - I also rang your dealers a few times when I noticed something awry with your markets. (this included the day that your platform quoted the Dow at around half its value - the S&P wasn't in my watchlist at the time, so I can't comment on that, but that seems to be the 7000 point mispricing the other guy on these threads complained was reversed.) Before I closed my account, I did get the impression that your staff had me down as one of those punters who is, in your words, "a spreadbetting firm's nightmare".
Speaking of this incident, it appears that you allowed someone to buy the S&P around the 700 level the other month, and were offering the Dow at 7000 ish - I know the markets were closed promptly when this occurred, but not quickly enough to stop people lifting the offer. I saw this, but didn't take the trade as the price was just unreasonable. I called in as the markets were pulled. However, the chap who made 7k at 1pp seemed to have bought, and you say you only noticed that because he was complaining about something else. Could you tell us exactly what went wrong that day to half the prices of those markets? Was there a brief "no bid" situation which caused you to take the average of 14000-something and zero? Is it possible that other clients bought at perhaps 10pp and are sitting with 70k in their accounts from a trade on a bad price?
I did not do this out of any loyalty to your firm. Aside from considering myself to be fair and reasonable, it was in my interests to act in this way. This reminds me of Bill Lipschutz breaking trades with an options MM - not to be kind, but because doing otherwise would be bad for the product - he was acting to protect his marketplace. If I called to get a missed stop filled, even if the position had moved in my favour, it was because I wanted certainty about the state of play, and not be concerned with closing a trade with a profit when it should have been a loss, and having adjustments made to my account later. If I called in about bad pricing errors on markets (7000 points out on the Dow for example), it was because I wanted the issue fixed so I could get back to the business of making money in the markets, which one cannot do if their SB firm won't quote (or is quoting so far out that they would not honour trades).
It is certainly educational for us to get an idea of how the insides of a SB firm work, what dealers do and do not check, etc. However I really don't think it is right for you to encourage people to be "sneaky" like this, and then work on the assumption that everyone is trying to rip you off. Perhaps I have the wrong end of the stick here, but it seems a little strange to me.
It is probably out of line for me to make a personal comment, but I'm sure it will be taken as lightly as it is intended: you seem to be in that perpetually awkward situation where you are constantly deciding between being one of the lads and being the boss. It is certainly not unusual for successful businessmen to know how (and be inclined) to push the envelope and investigate innovative ways to do things, including "beating the system" from time to time, but it seems a little odd that you playfully encourage us to do this with (to?) your own company. In the example of stops - if you had many clients with a position small enough each not to go directly to a dealer, who had stops peppered around the same level, which caused you to hedge the net risk and place stops in the market, and your stops were hit with the clients, and you were taken out but the clients were able to close their trades at a profit before your dealers could check all the stops - that is highly unfair to you, and I suspect it would damage your bottom line. Is that really something you want to teach people to do every time your staff are slow to fill a stop?
Monitoring that situation isn't free mate. Perhaps one not to watch! I understand that in a fast market the price may move on, but in practice it can take a dealer over 20 seconds to fill an order. CS is okay for the more liquid markets when you are on auto fill, but active traders, winners, exotic markets, and binary bets go to dealers, and there is a delay inherent in that. If the market has moved away from your price when you are trying to get out, you just won't be filled. To a large extent this is just how things are with SB, although in my experience CMC are more efficient at getting clients out of positions. My gripe involved a bias in getting into positions, given that the price was correct when I clicked on it, but may have moved in my favour 30 seconds later when a dealer got to it - I would not be filled in those circumstances, but would be filled if the price had moved against me (but was equally invalid as the underlying mid was outside the quoted spread).
Binary bets are a great way to lose money quickly. I do appreciate that there are some who make money, either through dumb luck, arbing between bookies, or through a very clever and complex system which only trades when the strikes line up (and involves hedging). However, for the average punter, the house has too much of an edge in binaries, and the spreads are pretty wide. You have no FSA protection with binaries either - in my view if you are interested in options through spreadbets you should take a look at the short dated options at IG (as they are still spread bets). IG also offer binaries, but I've just given my view on binary betting.
I understand that SB firms do well out of binaries, however it takes up a lot of dealer time due to the nature of binaries - I'd really much prefer if firms scrapped binaries and focused their dealer time on real markets.
Bond_Trader1 - you got stopped out. I agree that it was wrong for their system not to close the trade - I think that is something they should look into with IT. However, you were stopped out. You made a loss on that trade. My advice to you if this happens again would be to get right on the phone and have them close your position at the stop price provided that the market traded enough there that it is reasonable to be stopped at that price. Then, if you still believe you are right, get back into the position.
You could also close the position and simultaneously open a new one as Simon suggests. It is quite right to pay the spread again, as you were stopped out - if you want to be in the market after being stopped out, you need to pay to get back in. In any event, CS should be quite happy to work with you and amend any trades / P&L to reflect the situation as it would have occurred if your stop had been filled correctly. I am sure they will have no problem with doing this.
When I had my account, I can think of a few occasions when my forex stops were missed. Given that I did around half a lot in the forex, it seemed reasonable to assume no slippage in normal market conditions. It is a little disconcerting to see an open loss mounting 10 minutes after you should have been stopped out. What I simply did was give them 10 minutes, and if they had overlooked the stop I'd call in and their dealers would be quite happy to fill this. Naturally they will miss the odd order as they need to check that clients have been stopped at fair levels and this takes time. (and I am quite glad dealers do check the stops given their erratic FX feeds!). I would only call in sooner if I wanted to reopen the position, or if I needed the margin for another trade.
Simon - you are somewhat of an enigma. On one hand, you have an interest in the profitability of CS, and seem to have a fairly genuine intention to keep things "fair". While we may disagree about what fair means in terms of balancing the interests of CS and your clients, I do not doubt your sincerity. On the other hand, you seem reasonably willing to give the odd tip to folk here, and actively encourage them to try and "get a good deal" from CS.
Cases in point (I can't be bothered looking for the exact posts, or quoting you verbatim):
You have told us that if we see a "good deal" with you, we are welcome to take it.
You have told us in detail about your policies on trade checking, and mentioned things your firm would be "unlikely to notice".
You have made suggestions like the one above about closing a stopped out trade manually, realising a profit, and then opening another position to get back into the market. While I accept that a client should be able to open a new position in these cases, suggesting that a client closes out a stopped out trade at a more advantageous price than their stop level because of an IT problem, and being honest about the fact that your staff wouldn't notice this...
I would suggest that clients are less interested in getting a good deal than being treated fairly. You seem to hold the view (to an extent) that punters want to rip you off. I agree that there are a certain portion of people who would only trade on invalid prices. However, you seem a little jaded about the intentions of punters in general. In my view it would be somewhat unfair of a punter to make money out of what was ostensibly a losing position because your dealer missed a stop, and it doesn't seem quite right for you to suggest that they do this.
Ironically, I was one of the punters who would call in to get a missed stop activated, whether the position had come back in my favour or not - I also rang your dealers a few times when I noticed something awry with your markets. (this included the day that your platform quoted the Dow at around half its value - the S&P wasn't in my watchlist at the time, so I can't comment on that, but that seems to be the 7000 point mispricing the other guy on these threads complained was reversed.) Before I closed my account, I did get the impression that your staff had me down as one of those punters who is, in your words, "a spreadbetting firm's nightmare".
Speaking of this incident, it appears that you allowed someone to buy the S&P around the 700 level the other month, and were offering the Dow at 7000 ish - I know the markets were closed promptly when this occurred, but not quickly enough to stop people lifting the offer. I saw this, but didn't take the trade as the price was just unreasonable. I called in as the markets were pulled. However, the chap who made 7k at 1pp seemed to have bought, and you say you only noticed that because he was complaining about something else. Could you tell us exactly what went wrong that day to half the prices of those markets? Was there a brief "no bid" situation which caused you to take the average of 14000-something and zero? Is it possible that other clients bought at perhaps 10pp and are sitting with 70k in their accounts from a trade on a bad price?
I did not do this out of any loyalty to your firm. Aside from considering myself to be fair and reasonable, it was in my interests to act in this way. This reminds me of Bill Lipschutz breaking trades with an options MM - not to be kind, but because doing otherwise would be bad for the product - he was acting to protect his marketplace. If I called to get a missed stop filled, even if the position had moved in my favour, it was because I wanted certainty about the state of play, and not be concerned with closing a trade with a profit when it should have been a loss, and having adjustments made to my account later. If I called in about bad pricing errors on markets (7000 points out on the Dow for example), it was because I wanted the issue fixed so I could get back to the business of making money in the markets, which one cannot do if their SB firm won't quote (or is quoting so far out that they would not honour trades).
It is certainly educational for us to get an idea of how the insides of a SB firm work, what dealers do and do not check, etc. However I really don't think it is right for you to encourage people to be "sneaky" like this, and then work on the assumption that everyone is trying to rip you off. Perhaps I have the wrong end of the stick here, but it seems a little strange to me.
It is probably out of line for me to make a personal comment, but I'm sure it will be taken as lightly as it is intended: you seem to be in that perpetually awkward situation where you are constantly deciding between being one of the lads and being the boss. It is certainly not unusual for successful businessmen to know how (and be inclined) to push the envelope and investigate innovative ways to do things, including "beating the system" from time to time, but it seems a little odd that you playfully encourage us to do this with (to?) your own company. In the example of stops - if you had many clients with a position small enough each not to go directly to a dealer, who had stops peppered around the same level, which caused you to hedge the net risk and place stops in the market, and your stops were hit with the clients, and you were taken out but the clients were able to close their trades at a profit before your dealers could check all the stops - that is highly unfair to you, and I suspect it would damage your bottom line. Is that really something you want to teach people to do every time your staff are slow to fill a stop?
Well, Simon is at least contributing to this board, how many of the other SB representatives are doing that? Capitalspreads is getting quite big so I wonder how long he will stick around. His marketing efforts might be better utilized somewhere else. The nature of a forum like this is, that you simply cannot please everybody at the same time.
lurkerlurker
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,482
- Likes
- 150
London Capital Group has been big for years, and their SB firms have contributed substantially to their bottom line, again for years. I've said this before - it is good to have him here. I know you cannot please everybody at the same time, but I am sure that is not his aim.
I've taken the opportunity to look over this thread since the beginning now, and I notice that Simon has stuck around and politely and comprehensively answered our questions in the face of some quite discourteous behaviour (including one meta-troll who was being insulting and posting under several different names). I don't think he will leave us on my account, especially since my posts are fairly balanced.
The nature of a forum like this is also the nature of business - you cannot please all of your customers all of the time either. I think Simon, his co-directors, and his staff have done quite well out of managing to please most of the people most of the time though!
London Capital Group have almost doubled their turnaround last year. The same goes for their client base. This is an extraordinary growth by any standards. CS is clearly headed for big time and I am quite sure Simon won't be around this board much longer. He will have to tell me otherwise, ha ha! No offense meant, but who said he might leave this board because of you, I was referring to best utilized marketing positions. Again, about Simon leaving, this is totally my own opinion based on the rapid growth of the company. This might be very far away from what he and the company are planning.
I agree, Simon has done a really good job being on this board, even, as you say at times having been the receiving end of rude and unjustified criticism. I am sure he has not just done it for the fun of it. It has enhanced the company's support and client base growth. When the commercial impact of this forum becomes less important, will he really be around, I doubt it very much. Simon might be amused about this discussion.
babeny2001
Junior member
- Messages
- 12
- Likes
- 0
Mobile Platform
Just quick question, are there any plans, to introduce mobile trading/platform ? Current flashy interface doesn't run on PDA/smartphone browsers.
Ronald
Just quick question, are there any plans, to introduce mobile trading/platform ? Current flashy interface doesn't run on PDA/smartphone browsers.
Ronald
lurkerlurker
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,482
- Likes
- 150
John is one of the bot traders. You shouldn't have posted your ticket number - Simon says he doesn't like scalpers. To be honest I'm sure they don't care about the odd 50 quid win from a lagging price, but if you keep making money doing same-minute trades over numbers you will get put on dealer intervention. Even if the price wasn't lagging (and I note your fill wasn't at a pre-number price) I would think they would assume you were scalping.
Dealer acceptance isn't too much of a handicap with other firms, but with CS you can't cancel a pending order while you are waiting for a dealer, and the fill could take over a minute to come back over a major number. To be fair, their dealers are fast most of the time, but forget trading numbers if you get put on dealer intervention.
Dealer acceptance isn't too much of a handicap with other firms, but with CS you can't cancel a pending order while you are waiting for a dealer, and the fill could take over a minute to come back over a major number. To be fair, their dealers are fast most of the time, but forget trading numbers if you get put on dealer intervention.
Last edited:
lurkerlurker
Senior member
- Messages
- 2,482
- Likes
- 150
