SAVIUS a new prop firm looking for traders and...your comments

nickycambo

Junior member
15 5
Do it yourself

I ve waited a few weeks before decided to publish this post, but regardless of the insults which I’m going to receive I reckon a follow up on this topic is due for those who are genuinely interested on what the REAL numbers are.
When I set up Savius I was convinced I would have found a lot of traders with good potential and it was just a question of managing them correctly to be able to quickly build a team.
I had experience in finance, derivatives, trading, and also in start-ups but I wasn’t prepared at all. As usual experience is the best teacher and after a few months the picture is clearer and I start to realize why prop firms generally work the way they do.
1) Capital allocation or traders’ selection. We started financing traders with experience and a good CV which we selected recruited via Linkedin and interviewed in Chicago. Some had a fixed base salary some didn’t but they were all granted a performance bonus. We allocated a good portion of capital and a more than decent risk for intraday. Result? They all lost money
2) Then we changed model and switched to mass recruiting , introduced a test and reduced capital allocation. The idea was that if traders with pedigree did not guarantee results maybe we had to look elsewhere.
We left the door open for those traders considered “ experienced” who could get to live trading without having to pay and pass the Savius Trading Challenge.
The immediate consequence was being submerged by emails of people who considered themselves “experts” without any evidence whatsoever of live trading, many of which didn’t even want to spend a couple of lines explaining how they were trading or proving their results ( a few sent over a picture of their screens taken with their phones). Still we managed to select a few, which we tested on the simulator at no cost for them. Also a few members of this forum were granted the same free trial.
(Note: a free trial still has a cost for the company in terms of fees and resources).
Result was that all the traders which have been selected on the basis of their past performance and experience and sent live lost money.

3) This take us to the last recruitment type,: the Savius Trading Challenge.
As those who passed it were actually the only ones performing decently for a few months we got even more convinced that was the way to go.
The Challenge is hard and we know, but we do not expect people to have that performance once live, it will not make sense: it s only a stress test!
I ll add another comment: if you cannot pass our test or trade under our rules it does not mean you are not a profitable trader, it simply means you do not fit our risk model.

A few Stats….
That being said we were expecting that only 5% of candidates would have passed the test, while actually after a few months of stats 26% of the sample made it to live trading. Out of the live traders sample only 40% actually touched positive territory . The other 60% only went down and lost the whole allocated risk sometimes without even making a single positive trade.
Only 10 % of the live traders were actually positive enough for both of us to be profitable.
Surely we have been very generous in our test and live management , but still that does not change the meaning of the results: basically only 2% of the overall sample were actually “positive” traders.
I was expecting a 4/5% so either I’ve been over optimistic or unlucky with my first sample and maybe stats will converge towards the so called “ industry standards”.
So now you know what are your chances of actually living out of your trading: 2%.
Better or worse than becoming a professional soccer player or a popstar?

To draw a line of what we have learnt from observation:

1) A lot of potential good traders are not exploiting their full potential only for lack of discipline not for lack of capital. Capital is not the issue, especially if you trade futures intraday were you can get high leverage . Discipline is the issue. So if you are thinking about trading on your own , you do not need our capital to make , you just need to be consistent with your trading plan.
2) Traders who have some technical background and live experience are generally less humble and tend not to tolerate risk management and for this very reason the are not improving. Allocating capital to this type of trader rarely results positively unless the trader is followed very closely on his/her daily operations. So again from point 1) and 2) we get why trading from home all by yourself could be much more difficult than being part of a structure , even if you do have potential.
3) Nowadays there is a huge offer on the web for cheap and high quality education for those who want to learn the how to trade. Still many of those who are far passed the “beginners” phase still lack the proper knowledge of basic concepts such as trend identification and trade and money management.

Before you jump on my throat I understand myself why this business model has been criticized but think properly about the risk a prop firm takes to send a single trader live. Run the numbers yourself and think if we could possibly be making money only by selling the tests in the hope that more people would fail it than those we send live.

So all this to show you the other side of the barricade: it is not a nice as it may seem.

Then the question arises, if all the above are true, why bother to run a prop shop? Just take your capital and trade it yourself.
 

SAVIUS

Junior member
26 1
All the partners in Savius trade for living and I am actually in the process of setting up a fund in Monaco ( if I manage to get the license otherwise I ll go for a family office). I have been a professional trader since 2007 and I have no intention to stop.
Savius project had multiple purposes:
- parteners risk diversification. we spread risk over many traders/strategies . It s also an investment in a field that we know that is not directly related to our ability to trade but more on the management skills
- select a team of elite traders that could produce revenue, so that we would not be necessarily obliged to be in front of the screen everyday . We could also use Savius as recruitment center for other companies.

I personally also liked the idea of getting in contact with people and try to provide a service that was not there when I started and I genuinely believe is useful.
 

moka2

Established member
529 14
I ve waited a few weeks before decided to publish this post, but regardless of the insults which I’m going to receive I reckon a follow up on this topic is due for those who are genuinely interested on what the REAL numbers are.
When I set up Savius I was convinced I would have found a lot of traders with good potential and it was just a question of managing them correctly to be able to quickly build a team.
I had experience in finance, derivatives, trading, and also in start-ups but I wasn’t prepared at all. As usual experience is the best teacher and after a few months the picture is clearer and I start to realize why prop firms generally work the way they do.
1) Capital allocation or traders’ selection. We started financing traders with experience and a good CV which we selected recruited via Linkedin and interviewed in Chicago. Some had a fixed base salary some didn’t but they were all granted a performance bonus. We allocated a good portion of capital and a more than decent risk for intraday. Result? They all lost money
2) Then we changed model and switched to mass recruiting , introduced a test and reduced capital allocation. The idea was that if traders with pedigree did not guarantee results maybe we had to look elsewhere.
We left the door open for those traders considered “ experienced” who could get to live trading without having to pay and pass the Savius Trading Challenge.
The immediate consequence was being submerged by emails of people who considered themselves “experts” without any evidence whatsoever of live trading, many of which didn’t even want to spend a couple of lines explaining how they were trading or proving their results ( a few sent over a picture of their screens taken with their phones). Still we managed to select a few, which we tested on the simulator at no cost for them. Also a few members of this forum were granted the same free trial.
(Note: a free trial still has a cost for the company in terms of fees and resources).
Result was that all the traders which have been selected on the basis of their past performance and experience and sent live lost money.

3) This take us to the last recruitment type,: the Savius Trading Challenge.
As those who passed it were actually the only ones performing decently for a few months we got even more convinced that was the way to go.
The Challenge is hard and we know, but we do not expect people to have that performance once live, it will not make sense: it s only a stress test!
I ll add another comment: if you cannot pass our test or trade under our rules it does not mean you are not a profitable trader, it simply means you do not fit our risk model.

A few Stats….
That being said we were expecting that only 5% of candidates would have passed the test, while actually after a few months of stats 26% of the sample made it to live trading. Out of the live traders sample only 40% actually touched positive territory . The other 60% only went down and lost the whole allocated risk sometimes without even making a single positive trade.
Only 10 % of the live traders were actually positive enough for both of us to be profitable.
Surely we have been very generous in our test and live management , but still that does not change the meaning of the results: basically only 2% of the overall sample were actually “positive” traders.
I was expecting a 4/5% so either I’ve been over optimistic or unlucky with my first sample and maybe stats will converge towards the so called “ industry standards”.
So now you know what are your chances of actually living out of your trading: 2%.
Better or worse than becoming a professional soccer player or a popstar?

To draw a line of what we have learnt from observation:

1) A lot of potential good traders are not exploiting their full potential only for lack of discipline not for lack of capital. Capital is not the issue, especially if you trade futures intraday were you can get high leverage . Discipline is the issue. So if you are thinking about trading on your own , you do not need our capital to make , you just need to be consistent with your trading plan.
2) Traders who have some technical background and live experience are generally less humble and tend not to tolerate risk management and for this very reason the are not improving. Allocating capital to this type of trader rarely results positively unless the trader is followed very closely on his/her daily operations. So again from point 1) and 2) we get why trading from home all by yourself could be much more difficult than being part of a structure , even if you do have potential.
3) Nowadays there is a huge offer on the web for cheap and high quality education for those who want to learn the how to trade. Still many of those who are far passed the “beginners” phase still lack the proper knowledge of basic concepts such as trend identification and trade and money management.

Before you jump on my throat I understand myself why this business model has been criticized but think properly about the risk a prop firm takes to send a single trader live. Run the numbers yourself and think if we could possibly be making money only by selling the tests in the hope that more people would fail it than those we send live.

So all this to show you the other side of the barricade: it is not a nice as it may seem.

Appreciate the long explanation but this still does answers the question and bad press and skepticism about the model where it is suspected that the so called Prop firm is just interested in large no of people taking the $200 test , and hope 98% fail... Instead how about this idea You as a prop firm just act as financier only to those traders who want to put up risk capital! 10 from trader, 90 from you, you charge a fixed Interest on capital applied + a small performance fee .. this will be more transparent.. when I looked at somebody like Bright trading in US that is what they offer ( almost) NO free lunch to anybody!
 

SAVIUS

Junior member
26 1
Hey Moka,
what you say is absolutely correct and I totally understand.
We studied all different type of models before picking up this one .
The one you mentioned in particular is much more capital intense and doesnt look exceptionally fair either to me.
Let s look at it together:

You put down 10 pct of the capital, and I but down the remain 90%, but I overcharge you with fees of any sort (from commissions to interest as you say etc). If you lose 10 pct of the capital I stop you.
This means you are taking ALL the risk, I m surely making money on the commissions plus I ll make money in case you are a profitable trader. Yes a small % of money but at no risk!
Ah and in all this your are completely by yourself most of the times, unless you want to by my course off course , which cost ranges from 5 to 10K.
Surely this model has for the owner a better risk reward than what I am trying to achieve and that is why you also need a different type of regulation.
Doesnt seem like a good deal for a beginner trader to me, but that is my opinion.
As far as we are concerned, again lets run the numbers. I ll run them with what we have experience so far and I do not know if then the % of those passing the Challenge will go down to 2%, for the time being is 26%. These are the numbers we have and I can prove it. So we sell 100 tests at 200 , but cash only 14800 as 26 traders passed the challenge and go live. Of those 26 , 60% or 16 will simply lose all their risk straight away so 16 * 1500 = 24,000 USD.
At this point I m negative territory already without considering all the other related costs (salaries, office, softwares, etc). I need those 10 traders left to perform well enough and for long enough to give a chance to recover.
So again, why bothering then?
We are not the good Samaritan of trading, but I do believe by my experience that if I find the right people they can make back whatever we lost. So far we let live traders do how whatever they liked but it has not been a wise choice: people who get to us are obviously not pro and do need assistance. So my hope is to be able to keep as many traders trading live as possible with an accurate risk management so that we could maybe get the famous " home run" and I m sure we will get it.
Meanwhile, sure, I dont mind selling some other services to try and amortize my risk and I dont see anything wrong about it, especially considering one of them is risk management and from what I can see from see there is a big need for that.

Does this make sense for you?
 

moka2

Established member
529 14
Hey Moka,

What I am suggesting is nothing new it is like a Broker/ bank giving Margin loan !
In that case the Bank DOES not risks it's capital
Only difference is in a margin loan bank does not participate in any upside.

Also I did not mention anything about commissions, the trader pays for all brokerage, you don;t upload it

If a trader is confident he/ she should be willing to have skin in game!
and he gets to use a larger a/c + Leverage upon leverage ( if using Futures)

This way everything is transparent
No body can criticize you for having a questionable model
Obviously you have to check how this is regulated in the country you operate

Other respectable alternative is become grade A prop and employ people!
To give a parallel example a Car manufacturer does not charge new engineers a "Test fee" they put them on a salary!
 

SAVIUS

Junior member
26 1
Well ,Moka , thanks for the comments , I understand your point and I would eventually consider a model switch in the future but :

1) you are right, regulations are totally different.Much more complex as basically the company becomes similar to any financial institution that collects third party money. We currently do not trade anyone else s money and I like it that way.

2) the risk of that model really scares me. With all our risk controls etc, we still have live traders taking slippage or "forgetting" to use stops properly etc. Can you imagine sitting with 90% risk of a bunch of beginner traders thru an event like the Swiss Franc move? Having only 10% of cash collateral as guarantee?
I wouldnt sleep at night. That is probably why that kind of prop model actually charges so much in fees , as there is a potential high risk involved.

For what concerns the Salary thing I agree with you, that is how a trader should be trading, without having to worry constantly about performing to pay rent.
We do started that way: employing people, but did not worked very well for us.
I assume that also to be employed as engineer you will need a Degree and probably the car manufacturer will take you thru a series of interviews and tests .
The difference is that when you hire an engineer with a certain CV you can be almost sure he knows how to do his/her job, but with trading there is no University , if not experience, and no guarantees at all that even a good trader will continue to perform well.
 

NVP

Legendary member
37,754 2,099
Interesting thread S,,,,,,and in defending yourself with some good and insightful points you are not getting the traditional T2win roasting you expected ......what you've had is little league !

Good luck in the venture

N
 
Last edited:

moka2

Established member
529 14
Well ,Moka , thanks for the comments , I understand your point and I would eventually consider a model switch in the future but :


2) the risk of that model really scares me. With all our risk controls etc, we still have live traders taking slippage or "forgetting" to use stops properly etc. Can you imagine sitting with 90% risk of a bunch of beginner traders thru an event like the Swiss Franc move? Having only 10% of cash collateral as guarantee?
I wouldnt sleep at night.

Agree, and I am trying diff FCMs currently to see what External Risk management they offer? PM me

May be one way is to only allow Limited risk trading like spreads!
 

harama

Newbie
1 0
I was looking for prop firms on the internet and came across this thread, and I really had to make this post, my first one since 2008 when I became a member :) I'm just giving my 2 cents here on how this business model actually works, as I went through the process at TopStep ( which is absolutely the same kind of business as Savius, no matter what anyone says).
So here is what I realized after being funded by TST.. I spent about 5 months worth of continuous combine fees (over $800,00) for about 8 months total. I failed it twice and managed to pass it twice. The first time I passed it, I had to do the FTP (funded trader prep), in which they add 2 other rules to be followed: You have 10 days to trade (you can chose those) and reach a profit of $750,00. Your winning percentage must be at least 45%. I failed that and went back to the combine. After another couple of months (paying the fees obviously) I passed it again and finally got funded. So, I had to follow those stupid rules again on the funded account, being positive after the 10th day and have at least 45% winning days.
Sounds pretty easy right? The problem with trading those first 10 days is that in such a short period of time, the outcome of your trading tends to be pretty random. If you take any successful trader's track record over the years and divide it by blocks of 10 days, you will see that many of those blocks will have a negative P&L, but the trader will still be profitable in the long term. You can even do a simulation of that on a computer. Drawdowns happen all the time and they don't have any specific time to start or end. But a successful trader will always be able to recover over time.
In the FTP and in the first 10 days trading live you don't have such a luxury of a drawdown. Even a little one will be hard to overcome, given that its gonna affect your psychology as well. It just adds more pressure on the trader. It makes trading much more difficult. You just cannot set a time limit for something that works with probabilities. There is only so much a trader can control.
They have the odds on their side you see, they are the Casino and we are the gamblers. They know all the probabilities of a trader being successful after those 10 days and they take advantage of that. The less people passing the test, the better.
I had a little chat with the CEO, Mr Patak, and he said basically I needed more screen time (did I laugh?) and I should sign up for another combine. Then I asked for a free first month of a new one, since I had already passed it twice, and he said the company takes all the risk and the free month of a continuous combine wouldn't apply in my case. The point is, is he really interested in funding traders? I don't think so.
And does the company takes all the risk? I am 100% sure they DON'T! And here is why: I spent over $800,00 on fees to pass the combine. I lost the company only $700,00 in those 10 days. So, $800 - $700 = $100,00 profit for them. Who actually lost money overall?? I think I was the one. Do the business lose any money with traders at all? Absolutely not. I've heard of traders taking a year or even many years to pass the combine. Let's say 12 months on average (being conservative). So, 12 times $ 130,00 (the 30K combine ) is $1560,00 in fees. The max drawdown if you get funded on the 30K combine is $1500,00. Coincidence?
So, just by this little example we see that there is no risk taken on their side. And this is being conservative. Normally a newbie trader takes more than 12 months to get funded, if he/she gets funded at all. There is plenty of money coming in to mitigate all the "risk" they say they take.
Another stupid rule is the 45% winning thing. In 10 days period you simply cannot have 45% winning days! You either have 40% or 50%. But again, 45 looks good and much lower than 50, right?
Savius is exactly the same thing. Same business model. Even more difficult as it seems to be 10 CONTINUOUS days. I don't think you get to chose the days to trade.
So, people, if you think you are lucky, then go for it. You might as well buy a lottery ticket. How much will you have to spend before you win? Just open an account and make deposits every month. Practice and develop your trading for a year or so on sim and when you feel comfortable, switch to the real account. If you lose it, start all over again. At least you won't help sponsor those scammers. And its gonna be even easier and less stressful, as you wont have to meet those stupid annoying rules that make the traders life much more difficult.
Unfortunately people don't realise how they are being tricked, thinking it's all about the skills and all that, when in fact this is no different from online gambling.
You obviously have to develop your skills, but it wont matter much when you have to follow rules that are designed to work against you.
Always do your own research and trade well!
 

Lúidín

Established member
818 61
I was looking for prop firms on the internet and came across this thread, and I really had to make this post, my first one since 2008 when I became a member :) I'm just giving my 2 cents here on how this business model actually works, as I went through the process at TopStep ( which is absolutely the same kind of business as Savius, no matter what anyone says).
So here is what I realized after being funded by TST.. I spent about 5 months worth of continuous combine fees (over $800,00) for about 8 months total. I failed it twice and managed to pass it twice. The first time I passed it, I had to do the FTP (funded trader prep), in which they add 2 other rules to be followed: You have 10 days to trade (you can chose those) and reach a profit of $750,00. Your winning percentage must be at least 45%. I failed that and went back to the combine. After another couple of months (paying the fees obviously) I passed it again and finally got funded. So, I had to follow those stupid rules again on the funded account, being positive after the 10th day and have at least 45% winning days.
Sounds pretty easy right? The problem with trading those first 10 days is that in such a short period of time, the outcome of your trading tends to be pretty random. If you take any successful trader's track record over the years and divide it by blocks of 10 days, you will see that many of those blocks will have a negative P&L, but the trader will still be profitable in the long term. You can even do a simulation of that on a computer. Drawdowns happen all the time and they don't have any specific time to start or end. But a successful trader will always be able to recover over time.
In the FTP and in the first 10 days trading live you don't have such a luxury of a drawdown. Even a little one will be hard to overcome, given that its gonna affect your psychology as well. It just adds more pressure on the trader. It makes trading much more difficult. You just cannot set a time limit for something that works with probabilities. There is only so much a trader can control.
They have the odds on their side you see, they are the Casino and we are the gamblers. They know all the probabilities of a trader being successful after those 10 days and they take advantage of that. The less people passing the test, the better.
I had a little chat with the CEO, Mr Patak, and he said basically I needed more screen time (did I laugh?) and I should sign up for another combine. Then I asked for a free first month of a new one, since I had already passed it twice, and he said the company takes all the risk and the free month of a continuous combine wouldn't apply in my case. The point is, is he really interested in funding traders? I don't think so.
And does the company takes all the risk? I am 100% sure they DON'T! And here is why: I spent over $800,00 on fees to pass the combine. I lost the company only $700,00 in those 10 days. So, $800 - $700 = $100,00 profit for them. Who actually lost money overall?? I think I was the one. Do the business lose any money with traders at all? Absolutely not. I've heard of traders taking a year or even many years to pass the combine. Let's say 12 months on average (being conservative). So, 12 times $ 130,00 (the 30K combine ) is $1560,00 in fees. The max drawdown if you get funded on the 30K combine is $1500,00. Coincidence?
So, just by this little example we see that there is no risk taken on their side. And this is being conservative. Normally a newbie trader takes more than 12 months to get funded, if he/she gets funded at all. There is plenty of money coming in to mitigate all the "risk" they say they take.
Another stupid rule is the 45% winning thing. In 10 days period you simply cannot have 45% winning days! You either have 40% or 50%. But again, 45 looks good and much lower than 50, right?
Savius is exactly the same thing. Same business model. Even more difficult as it seems to be 10 CONTINUOUS days. I don't think you get to chose the days to trade.
So, people, if you think you are lucky, then go for it. You might as well buy a lottery ticket. How much will you have to spend before you win? Just open an account and make deposits every month. Practice and develop your trading for a year or so on sim and when you feel comfortable, switch to the real account. If you lose it, start all over again. At least you won't help sponsor those scammers. And its gonna be even easier and less stressful, as you wont have to meet those stupid annoying rules that make the traders life much more difficult.
Unfortunately people don't realise how they are being tricked, thinking it's all about the skills and all that, when in fact this is no different from online gambling.
You obviously have to develop your skills, but it wont matter much when you have to follow rules that are designed to work against you.
Always do your own research and trade well!

Nice to see someone with a bit of common sense, even if it had to come the hard way.

Nobody in this life does anything for nothing, especially if there is money involved.

There are several things wrong with the approach stated by the Op here, and I will comment in detail later, as I do not have time now.

Btw, the Op is entitled to try whatever business he likes, and what he is offering might actually help some people in understanding more about gambling, as when you look at what others are looking for just to share knowledge that is widely common, his fee might not be that much in relation to what you might learn.

I will give him a chance to prove some of what he says, as he should have no problem doing same if he is genuinely interested in selling something to others.

Lúidín
 

SAVIUS

Junior member
26 1
Hey Harama,
Your post is quite similar to many other posts that you can read on this subject on this and other forums.
If you went thru the whole post, I m pretty sure you know already that I generally tend to agree to what you write, as it is uncontestable, but your analysis leaves behind a few crucial facts.
Also I find it unfair calling TST or Savius “scammers” as we are both entrepreneurs risking our own money and I don’t see any fraud or misrepresentation about how the two companies conduct their business. It would be like calling you a losing trader as you spend your time writing on a forum and try to pass the Combine. I don’t know who you are, and where you come from, so I wouldn’t do it.
This forum gives you the freedom to express an opinion, but not to be impolite for no reason.
As per your calculations , again if you read the previous posts, I find them inaccurate. The stats are not the same of a Casino, a lot more people pass the Combine or the Challenge than those who leave their salaries on the green velvet table.. A losing live trader cost will be covered by roughly 9 failed Challenges. Furthermore in your equation you don’t factor in all the company s costs: web marketing, salaries, offices, insurance, etc, etc.
I do have a lot of respect for whoever puts his money on the table to try and create a prop trading business , as it is very difficult and risky.
TST model and Savius model are similar indeed not identical, I don’t feel I am competing with them directly, as we sell different products on our websites and conduct different marketing strategies ( we do not investing in marketing at the moment).
I disagree also on the fact that you reckon that our test is more difficult only as it involves trading 10 days in a row. Our rules are much easier, we don’t have a % of winners rule for example nor FTP selection phase ( but obviously I have a biased opinion).
Again you are right when you say that every good trader can have a drawdown of 10 days. They can also have a drawdown of 10 months and still be profitable over 10 years, but that is not a game for many pockets. You can apply many statistical model to try and guestimate the distribution of your positive and negative trades, but there is no way to have a certain outcome.
We could expand the test period, but that would require making it more expensive , to cover market fees and resources to track the performance, and still that will not change much the “randomness” applied to the selection (again we agree).
Even using more capital wouldn’t not necessarily increase the odds. From what we have observed it only increase the losses. That is why we prefer to reduce leverage .
So to cut a long story short, we are not trying to focus on the % of positive traders, as we can’t control that, we try to focus on the Reward each positive trader can produce compare to the associated risk.
The reality is that large majority of the players of this “ Casino” ( as you call it) lose money, our money, and most of the times committing very basic mistakes. The same guys, who are not professional traders for a reason, also do not like to receive advices on risk or trade management. Reality is (again) that large majority of people approaching us , especially losing traders, think it’s not their fault if they are not trading like a pro: it must be Savius s fault and their stupid rules, or market’s fault or it just depends on lack of money.
Again , trust me on this, large majority of people do not need our money, at all. They need a structure, but when we try to provide it, something inside them gets frustrated, the same part that is holding them back from becoming successful and that make some of them attack so vigorously Savius or TST.
Harama, I would be happy to offer you a free Savius Trading Challenge, so that you can write about my company a proper feedback based on a direct experience. From what you say then you obviously idislike this business model and this will not make you change your mind, and but at least you could write a more relevant post.
I’ m not trying to buy your consent here btw.
Some members of this forum who contacted me in private were offered free Challenges as well, but strangely enough none of them posted a couple of lines to say it.
Probably better as you would have thought it was me or my cousin writing it.
Obviously this is not an invitation to the other users of the forum to call us “scammers” in order to receive a free trial nor to pm me for the same reason.

As a final note just to keep updated those that are intellectual curios about the developments, we are considering making a few changes probably next year.
We have observed that many of our juniors perform very well on a simulated environment but then fail once they go live. Psychology has a HUGE impact.
We are thinking about a solution where we can pay a trader to trade simply on a sim account or maybe just don’t let him know when he is on a real money account or not. We are working with our software developer , I ll keep you posted on this.
We are also considering partnering with another firm in order to be able to offer more leverage quicker. But for the time being these are ideas.
 

SAVIUS

Junior member
26 1
Nice to see someone with a bit of common sense, even if it had to come the hard way.

Nobody in this life does anything for nothing, especially if there is money involved.

There are several things wrong with the approach stated by the Op here, and I will comment in detail later, as I do not have time now.

Btw, the Op is entitled to try whatever business he likes, and what he is offering might actually help some people in understanding more about gambling, as when you look at what others are looking for just to share knowledge that is widely common, his fee might not be that much in relation to what you might learn.

I will give him a chance to prove some of what he says, as he should have no problem doing same if he is genuinely interested in selling something to others.

Lúidín

Hey Luidin,
again, if you read the whole post , there is no place when I am saying our test is easy at all. It is damn difficult and the rate of success is 26%. But we are here to finance the best of the bests, not to give money away for charity.
As far as I am concerned, I dont have to prove I can trade, I know I can as that is what i do for living and I am actually setting up a trading entity in MC that would start operating next year. You can check my linkedin profile and you will notice I ve been trading professionally since 2007 ( I was a broker before) and I have endorsements from a lot of respected professionals of the industry.
I dont really need people to "give me a chance", simply if you dont like our approach , then dont visit our website. Send your CV to Goldman or Bight, or trade your own money.

That being said I hold a small private live trading room, where I trade REAL money with the same risk parameters we use for Savius traders. I do it once per week and it s free ( again what a scammer I am uh? sucking money wherever i can). I am doing it just to try and show to a few people how to trade conservatively with small risk.

It is only for a few people all Italians, but I understand you are Italian as well, so you are welcome to join, as long as you approach the room with no mental pre-concepts and respect the others.
So you can see that I put my money where my mouth is and ask yourself if you would do the same.

:)
 

SAVIUS

Junior member
26 1
apologies

Sorry mate I wrote too quickly, I see you are from Ireland, apologies.:eek: (ouch!!)

I ll probably do something similar next year for English speaking friends, and again your are welcome to join, if you wish.
 

Lúidín

Established member
818 61
Sorry mate I wrote too quickly, I see you are from Ireland, apologies.:eek: (ouch!!)

I ll probably do something similar next year for English speaking friends, and again your are welcome to join, if you wish.

Apologies accepted, as we all make mistakes.

Firstly, if you read my post correctly you will see I did not call you anything, as I have no reason to.

Secondly, when I talk about a chance, I mean give you a chance to show people here, as it is here you are trying to sell, what exactly you are talking about in relation to what way you will only allow other people trade your money.

Thirdly, you might be missing out on a lot of good traders by ignoring US stock trading, as it is possible to daytrade US stocks successfully for much less risk than Index Futures, once you know how to do it of course.

This discussion is getting interesting, which is good, as there is far too much talk about the same old stuff, which is very boring.

I am looking forward to some good arguing with you :)

Lúidín
 
 
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

But it's thanks to our sponsors that access to Trade2Win remains free for all. By viewing our ads you help us pay our bills, so please support the site and disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock