ETX capital slippage..

[gle101]

Brokers don't have to give the same price feed to all clients at the same time. Even under TCF different clients can be shown different prices. Don't assume this is to your cost or detriment. This industry is all about scale and if that means a broker needs to protect their liquidity providers from a single predatory trader in order to protect their mass of clients then they will. No one client is bigger than the model, as soon as they are, that brokerage firm is in the deep doo dah.

I guess you represent the "market maker" industry, fine with me. Anyway what happened to MIFID best execution directive, is it something market makers can override whenever they so desire?

 

[highbury fx]

I guess you represent the "market maker" industry, fine with me. Anyway what happened to MIFID best execution directive, is it something market makers can override whenever they so desire?

I don't represent anyone. Do I have to represent someone to be able to respond to threads and questions.

I know a lot about this industry, certainly as much as any other person on trade2win.

I understand it is easy to jump to the wrong conclusion and that retail clients of s/b companies get the impression they're fodder and disposable.

Best execution is alive and kicking and adhered to but that's nothing to do with price feeds. If a client who is hedged is taking a lot of money out of USD/CHF then a certain bank who is getting their a4se kicked by this client may request to the broker that their USD/CHF feed is not shown to that particular client. The broker will respect that request and remove that bank from the USD/CHF feed that that client trades on. Now that client is on a different feed to the other 99+% of clients but best execution will still apply with the feed he is getting.

This industry is incredibly competitive and expensive to acquire clients, the last thing s/b firms want to do is get a reputation for being difficult to do business with. STP firms don't capture your loss, they earn commission on your trades in terms of pips and funding. B book firms will capture a lot of your loss but generally south of 90%. Retail clients will generally lose a little more than the spread they have paid over the life of their account which is remarkably impressive. It means they have gone toe to toe with the market for much of their trading life. The spread after all is the market makers advantage and it would be an achievement to beat the spread over a period of time.

Most spread bet firms are pretty decent. They quote tight prices on very sophisticated platforms and only ask for a tiny fraction of the notional deal size as margin. They go to great lengths to keep their platform live and stable and generally want to stay completely out of your way and let you get on with it.

There are lots of clients who think they have found a sneaky way to nick some pips and it is because the brokers have to act with so much integrity and etiquette when they are dealing in the interbank market that they get upset when clients do not offer the same courtesy to them.

In an ideal world you'd log on to your account, deal on some nice prices and have a fair chance of making some money. When s/b firms automatically slip stops time and time again you should bring that to their attention and ask to see some evidence of the price action around the time your stop was executed but slippage every now and then is part and parcel of the market.

 

[gle101]

I don't represent anyone. Do I have to represent someone to be able to respond to threads and questions.

I know a lot about this industry, certainly as much as any other person on trade2win.

I understand it is easy to jump to the wrong conclusion and that retail clients of s/b companies get the impression they're fodder and disposable.

Best execution is alive and kicking and adhered to but that's nothing to do with price feeds. If a client who is hedged is taking a lot of money out of USD/CHF then a certain bank who is getting their a4se kicked by this client may request to the broker that their USD/CHF feed is not shown to that particular client. The broker will respect that request and remove that bank from the USD/CHF feed that that client trades on. Now that client is on a different feed to the other 99+% of clients but best execution will still apply with the feed he is getting.

This industry is incredibly competitive and expensive to acquire clients, the last thing s/b firms want to do is get a reputation for being difficult to do business with. STP firms don't capture your loss, they earn commission on your trades in terms of pips and funding. B book firms will capture a lot of your loss but generally south of 90%. Retail clients will generally lose a little more than the spread they have paid over the life of their account which is remarkably impressive. It means they have gone toe to toe with the market for much of their trading life. The spread after all is the market makers advantage and it would be an achievement to beat the spread over a period of time.

Most spread bet firms are pretty decent. They quote tight prices on very sophisticated platforms and only ask for a tiny fraction of the notional deal size as margin. They go to great lengths to keep their platform live and stable and generally want to stay completely out of your way and let you get on with it.

There are lots of clients who think they have found a sneaky way to nick some pips and it is because the brokers have to act with so much integrity and etiquette when they are dealing in the interbank market that they get upset when clients do not offer the same courtesy to them.

In an ideal world you'd log on to your account, deal on some nice prices and have a fair chance of making some money. When s/b firms automatically slip stops time and time again you should bring that to their attention and ask to see some evidence of the price action around the time your stop was executed but slippage every now and then is part and parcel of the market.

Sorry about my insinuation you had anything to do with the industry, of course you are entitled to express you viewpoints on this forum. Still I feel you have very one sided standpoint, but that is my personal opinion. I have often myself been accused of the same, taking the brokers side. However I do not agree with a lot of what you are saying and it certainly does not correspond with the MiFID directives. Terms and conditions cannot override the MiFID financial directives, that is quite clear.

About the industry I certainly agree for the most part they are ok, although this past year, the smaller players seem to have become more aggressive in what they call "protecting" themselves. And let me tell you, they are quite good themselves in "nicking" some pips here and there.

 

[highbury fx]

Sorry about my insinuation you had anything to do with the industry, of course you are entitled to express you viewpoints on this forum. Still I feel you have very one sided standpoint, but that is my personal opinion. I have often myself been accused of the same, taking the brokers side. However I do not agree with a lot of what you are saying and it certainly does not correspond with the MiFID directives. Terms and conditions cannot override the MiFID financial directives, that is quite clear.

About the industry I certainly agree for the most part they are ok, although this past year, the smaller players seem to have become more aggressive in what they call "protecting" themselves. And let me tell you, they are quite good themselves in "nicking" some pips here and there.

I've read some of your posts and I appreciate you know what you're talking about. Most people here come for some help and advice and I want to be able to help them.

My critics would say I'm supporting brokers and that isn't strictly true. I will offer an opinion that perhaps they aren't privy to and they can either choose to take it on board or jump to conclusions that will eventually make me pack my coat and disappear from here. That would be a shame because like Simon Denham I know what goes on but unlike Simon I'm not the mouthpiece of a particular firm and can shoot from the hip.

Price bias is wrong and contravenes what best execution is trying to achieve. Putting moody clients on different price feeds is not wrong. The alternative is to put those clients on manual intervention by the dealing desks and that would be more of a problem for the client than being on a different feed as well as being a pain in the butt for the dealing desk for manually having to deal with a client that is problematic.

If everybody had to always quote the same price how would we have a market. Different banks show different rates to thousands and thousands of different clients depending on their flow, volume, products dealt, credit rating, sentiment etc... why would a spreadbet firm be different.

 

[gle101]

I've read some of your posts and I appreciate you know what you're talking about. Most people here come for some help and advice and I want to be able to help them.

My critics would say I'm supporting brokers and that isn't strictly true. I will offer an opinion that perhaps they aren't privy to and they can either choose to take it on board or jump to conclusions that will eventually make me pack my coat and disappear from here. That would be a shame because like Simon Denham I know what goes on but unlike Simon I'm not the mouthpiece of a particular firm and can shoot from the hip.

Price bias is wrong and contravenes what best execution is trying to achieve. Putting moody clients on different price feeds is not wrong. The alternative is to put those clients on manual intervention by the dealing desks and that would be more of a problem for the client than being on a different feed as well as being a pain in the butt for the dealing desk for manually having to deal with a client that is problematic.

If everybody had to always quote the same price how would we have a market. Different banks show different rates to thousands and thousands of different clients depending on their flow, volume, products dealt, credit rating, sentiment etc... why would a spreadbet firm be different.

Yes that is true, good to have both sides of the coin, in general I agree, the market makers are not against you. But as I have said before, in order to get rid of undesirable clients the market makers have to close the account.

What would your feelings be towards a casino that had rigged tables, giving less favorable odds to a certain category of gamblers?

 

[highbury fx]

Yes that is true, good to have both sides of the coin, in general I agree, the market makers are not against you. But as I have said before, in order to get rid of undesirable clients the market makers have to close the account.

What would your feelings be towards a casino that had rigged tables, giving less favorable odds to a certain category of gamblers?

the spreadbet market is casino-esque and like a casino a lot of spreadbet clients treat their account and the market as a form of entertainment. we cant judge them on that.

if I went to a casino and done my money I wouldn't moan. if I went to a casino and done my money on a bent roulette table i'd go nuts.

most casinos know they'll have a fair chance of getting their clients money eventually and try to make the experience a positive one for the client. Spreadbet firms think no differently.

 

[gle101]

the spreadbet market is casino-esque and like a casino a lot of spreadbet clients treat their account and the market as a form of entertainment. we cant judge them on that.

if I went to a casino and done my money I wouldn't moan. if I went to a casino and done my money on a bent roulette table i'd go nuts.

most casinos know they'll have a fair chance of getting their clients money eventually and try to make the experience a positive one for the client. Spreadbet firms think no differently.

Ok, at least you agree on the main aspect , going into the casino you know the odds in advance and what are actually against you. The same thing should apply to the market maker industry, which in fact is the existence and the core of MiFID financial directives. Yes the companies would like you to stay for a long time and enjoy your trading. This doesn't mean they are allowed to behave in any which way they like in order to get rid of you if you are undesirable.

 

[highbury fx]

Ok, at least you agree on the main aspect , going into the casino you know the odds in advance and what are actually against you. The same thing should apply to the market maker industry, which in fact is the existence and the core of MiFID financial directives. Yes the companies would like you to stay for a long time and enjoy your trading. This doesn't mean they are allowed to behave in any way they like in order to get rid of you if you are undisireable.

I agree they cant act in any way they like in order to get rid of you.

But they can get rid of you. It is their firm and they are under no obligation to accept you as a client or retain you as a client.

Of course they shouldn't have to use a dodgy roulette table to get rid of you but spreadbet firms methods are slightly different. they will try and retain the advantage by doing what they're allowed to do which includes A booking you or putting you on different price feeds or putting you on manual. It's up to the client to decide what casino/sb firm deserves your custom.

Personally I think ETX are a great firm. They came from a very congested space which they had to not only compete with but overtake. They've seen off WorldSpreads, MF Global and Cantor Index and they've overtaken in terms of revenue Capital Spreads to become a real competitor to CMC and City Index.. They've done that because they satisfied more clients than they pissed off.

I'd like to reiterate that I don't work at ETX in case anyone thinks my opinion is biased. I won't talk about my past but I will talk openly about the model behind these types of firms if the right questions are asked.

 

[gle101]

I agree they cant act in any way they like in order to get rid of you.

But they can get rid of you. It is their firm and they are under no obligation to accept you as a client or retain you as a client.

Of course they shouldn't have to use a dodgy roulette table to get rid of you but spreadbet firms methods are slightly different. they will try and retain the advantage by doing what they're allowed to do which includes A booking you or putting you on different price feeds or putting you on manual. It's up to the client to decide what casino/sb firm deserves your custom.

Personally I think ETX are a great firm. They came from a very congested space which they had to not only compete with but overtake. They've seen off WorldSpreads, MF Global and Cantor Index and they've overtaken in terms of revenue Capital Spreads to become a real competitor to CMC and City Index.. They've done that because they satisfied more clients than they pissed off.

I'd like to reiterate that I don't work at ETX in case anyone thinks my opinion is biased. I won't talk about my past but I will talk openly about the model behind these types of firms if the right questions are asked.

Yes absolutely, the SB firms have every right to exclude you as a client, and rightfully so. But some of the methods you are "suggesting" are exactly as a rigged roulette table, in some cases you don't even know why (such as a different price feed) why you are worst off than before. This doesn't correspond well with the the MiFID and its directives for transparency of the markets you are trading.

Yes I like ETX myself, despite questionable slippage at times. Very fast platform and really quick execution. That is why I simply cannot understand their T&C, it will give them bad publicity, such as some of the posting here. As I have said no. of times before, T&C cannot override that of the MiFID directives, even if signed by the client.

 

[highbury fx]

Yes absolutely, the SB firms have every right to exclude you as a client, and rightfully so. But some of the methods you are "suggesting" are exactly as a rigged roulette table, in some cases you don't even know why (such as a different price feed) why you are worst off than before. This doesn't correspond well with the the MiFID and its directives for transparency of the markets you are trading.

Yes I like ETX myself, despite questionable slippage at times. Very fast platform and really quick execution. That is why I simply cannot understand their T&C, it will give them bad publicity, such as some of the posting here. As I have said no. of times before, T&C cannot override that of the MiFID directives, even if signed by the client.

It may seem like they're rigging the table but they're not doing anything they aren't allowed to and with the greatest respect however you personally interpret MiFID and their directives the spreadbet firms will have teams of attorneys and compliance experts interpret them as well. There isn't a list of rules from the FCA or other regulators but there is a guideline to what is expected of regulated firms and it is this translation of the guidelines that causes ambiguity. That doesn't mean they are contravening specific instructions, it means they have a different opinion than you.

Their terms and conditions suit there way of business and there way of business was to not accommodate scalpers. That's their pregoative and if a clients method of trading is scalping then these t+c's will make it cleat that they're probably best off taking their methods to one of the dozens of other firms that welcome scalpers. They're telling you what they expect of you before you open an account not changing the rules once they notice you. I think profiling someone as a scalper if they close the open position within 2 minutes is being a bit over sensitive but it's up to them to make their rules and up to their potential clients to agree or not agree to them.

 

[gle101]

It may seem like they're rigging the table but they're not doing anything they aren't allowed to and with the greatest respect however you personally interpret MiFID and their directives the spreadbet firms will have teams of attorneys and compliance experts interpret them as well. There isn't a list of rules from the FCA or other regulators but there is a guideline to what is expected of regulated firms and it is this translation of the guidelines that causes ambiguity. That doesn't mean they are contravening specific instructions, it means they have a different opinion than you.

Their terms and conditions suit there way of business and there way of business was to not accommodate scalpers. That's their pregoative and if a clients method of trading is scalping then these t+c's will make it cleat that they're probably best off taking their methods to one of the dozens of other firms that welcome scalpers. They're telling you what they expect of you before you open an account not changing the rules once they notice you. I think profiling someone as a scalper if they close the open position within 2 minutes is being a bit over sensitive but it's up to them to make their rules and up to their potential clients to agree or not agree to them.

Let me explain what I think is the cause of this kind of client-broker problem. It all comes down to the technology of the platform, the speed of the price feed, display and execution. If there is some kind of lag of the price feed in any market condition is not good, this in combination with fixed spread could result in the SB being in trouble, and here is where some of the small companies are failing.

Therefor I believe that in the near future variable spread will be prominent among the major SB's (CFDs), and those companies that cannot provide a non lagging price feed will have hard time competing. Such a thing as the SB blaming lagging price feed will not hold anymore, and these companies will be goner. Also I think that the MiFID will have a more important meaning for the SB in setting up fair terms and conditions for the client.

 

[gle101]

It may seem like they're rigging the table but they're not doing anything they aren't allowed to and with the greatest respect however you personally interpret MiFID and their directives the spreadbet firms will have teams of attorneys and compliance experts interpret them as well. There isn't a list of rules from the FCA or other regulators but there is a guideline to what is expected of regulated firms and it is this translation of the guidelines that causes ambiguity. That doesn't mean they are contravening specific instructions, it means they have a different opinion than you.

Their terms and conditions suit there way of business and there way of business was to not accommodate scalpers. That's their pregoative and if a clients method of trading is scalping then these t+c's will make it cleat that they're probably best off taking their methods to one of the dozens of other firms that welcome scalpers. They're telling you what they expect of you before you open an account not changing the rules once they notice you. I think profiling someone as a scalper if they close the open position within 2 minutes is being a bit over sensitive but it's up to them to make their rules and up to their potential clients to agree or not agree to them.

The last part of your post is in my point of view not correct. I guess you have read the MiFID financial directives, where it in black and white says that a T&L cannot override that of the MiFID financial directives. It would have been an absurd circumstance if that would have been the case. Whether you have sign the T&C or not is as I understand insignificant.

 

[highbury fx]

The last part of your post is in my point of view not correct. I guess you have read the MiFID financial directives, where it in black and white says that a T&L cannot override that of the MiFID financial directives. It would have been an absurd circumstance if that would have been the case. Whether you have sign the T&C or not is as I understand insignificant.

but that's their scalping policy its nothing to do with MiFID. If they tell you they consider scalping to be in and out within 2 minutes then that's up to them.. if on that basis they don't want a certain type of client they don't have to open the account.. if that type of client opens an account and his trading style contravenes the terms and conditions of ETX then they are at liberty to close the account or take action.

 

[gle101]

but that's their scalping policy its nothing to do with MiFID. If they tell you they consider scalping to be in and out within 2 minutes then that's up to them.. if on that basis they don't want a certain type of client they don't have to open the account.. if that type of client opens an account and his trading style contravenes the terms and conditions of ETX then they are at liberty to close the account or take action.

You really go all the way protecting the T&C.

 

[gle101]

but that's their scalping policy its nothing to do with MiFID. If they tell you they consider scalping to be in and out within 2 minutes then that's up to them.. if on that basis they don't want a certain type of client they don't have to open the account.. if that type of client opens an account and his trading style contravenes the terms and conditions of ETX then they are at liberty to close the account or take action.

No you are probably right about them sticking to the T&C. I trade with them just to check them out how they were executing, don't really see a future in the long run trading with them anyway. It is a shame as ETX have got good potential.

 

[highbury fx]

You really go all the way protecting the T&C.

lol... I have no interest in what they do and will not protect them in the slightest.

I want to make you understand the difference between their policies in their terms and conditions and governmental directives. Their t&C's are the conditions under which they run their business and accept trades etc, there is no obligation on any client to sign up to their conditions. The MiFID and TCF guidelines are not there to protect ETX they are there to protect the client by helping to create an environment that is fair and reasonable and the broker must interpret those guidelines carefully and implement the policy.

A brokers terms and conditions should not breach MiFID protocol - that would be very novice.

I like our banter but i'm done for today and with this thread for a while. I don't want to get too focused on one firm.

 

[gle101]

lol... I have no interest in what they do and will not protect them in the slightest.

I want to make you understand the difference between their policies in their terms and conditions and governmental directives. Their t&C's are the conditions under which they run their business and accept trades etc, there is no obligation on any client to sign up to their conditions. The MiFID and TCF guidelines are not there to protect ETX they are there to protect the client by helping to create an environment that is fair and reasonable and the broker must interpret those guidelines carefully and implement the policy.

A brokers terms and conditions should not breach MiFID protocol - that would be very novice.

I like our banter but i'm done for today and with this thread for a while. I don't want to get too focused on one firm.

Ok, that is fine with me as well, see you around.

 

[MrLeverage]

Just to report back on the slippage issues being so great with ETX capital. I have withdrawn all my funds from my ETX account and closed my account- due to the absurd sliipage I was suffering, even in low volume low volatile markets.

I have transferred my business to another firm and am consequently enjoying much less slippage and as a result far better profits.

I would personally not reccommend ETX Capital when there are many other providers out there.

Mac

Same.

 

[SabreTT]

ETX filled me at a price that didnt even exist on that day. Their argument seemed to be that it was a fair price the previous week so it carried over in their system as valid pricing

Im not sure what is wrong with them exactly, Im hoping to get rid and close my account. Currently they owe me money on a couple positions but again its very hard to get them to pay even when they do acknowledge they are in the wrong and market data shows Im due credit, Im still waiting 6 months now.

I spoke to an 'account manager' but apparently he forgets it as soon as the phone was down.
I suggest if anyone has problems, do not give them any leeway as that has been my mistake to assume somebody would clear it up but they just are not interested in good business apparently

 

[highbury fx]

ETX filled me at a price that didnt even exist on that day. Their argument seemed to be that it was a fair price the previous week so it carried over in their system as valid pricing

Im not sure what is wrong with them exactly, Im hoping to get rid and close my account. Currently they owe me money on a couple positions but again its very hard to get them to pay even when they do acknowledge they are in the wrong and market data shows Im due credit, Im still waiting 6 months now.

I spoke to an 'account manager' but apparently he forgets it as soon as the phone was down.
I suggest if anyone has problems, do not give them any leeway as that has been my mistake to assume somebody would clear it up but they just are not interested in good business apparently

if you don't get the answers from sales staff or they don't respond with help when they say they will then escalate the complaint or query to compliance. They are obliged to respond to different stages of a complaint within certain times. Filling you at a non-existent price isn't allowed and you should follow this up to get some evidence of the price action when your order was filled.. basic stuff right.

send the email to here: [email protected] you'll get your own way much easier if you use a nice tone and be as factual as possible, not personal.