How to Set Credit Limits - Credit Management Article ...
Understanding Forex Trade Sizes Using Notional Value
Forex (FX) Definition and Uses
Making Sense of Day Trading Order Types
Definition of "Overnight Limit" in Forex Trading
Forex Trading Glossary, Learn About Currency Trading ...
Top 10 Forex Brokers and Trading Platforms by Top10Forex.net
Net open position - Oxford Reference
Daily Trading Limit Definition
Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Swaps* (*But Were Afraid To Ask)
Hello, dummies It's your old pal, Fuzzy. As I'm sure you've all noticed, a lot of the stuff that gets posted here is - to put it delicately - fucking ridiculous. More backwards-ass shit gets posted to wallstreetbets than you'd see on a Westboro Baptist community message board. I mean, I had a look at the daily thread yesterday and..... yeesh. I know, I know. We all make like the divine Laura Dern circa 1992 on the daily and stick our hands deep into this steaming heap of shit to find the nuggets of valuable and/or hilarious information within (thanks for reading, BTW). I agree. I love it just the way it is too. That's what makes WSB great. What I'm getting at is that a lot of the stuff that gets posted here - notwithstanding it being funny or interesting - is just... wrong. Like, fucking your cousin wrong. And to be clear, I mean the fucking your *first* cousin kinda wrong, before my Southerners in the back get all het up (simmer down, Billy Ray - I know Mabel's twice removed on your grand-sister's side). Truly, I try to let it slide. Idomybit to try and put you on the right path. Most of the time, I sleep easy no matter how badly I've seen someone explain what a bank liquidity crisis is. But out of all of those tens of thousands of misguided, autistic attempts at understanding the world of high finance, one thing gets so consistently - so *emphatically* - fucked up and misunderstood by you retards that last night I felt obligated at the end of a long work day to pull together this edition of Finance with Fuzzy just for you. It's so serious I'm not even going to make a u/pokimane gag. Have you guessed what it is yet? Here's a clue. It's in the title of the post. That's right, friends. Today in the neighborhood we're going to talk all about hedging in financial markets - spots, swaps, collars, forwards, CDS, synthetic CDOs, all that fun shit. Don't worry; I'm going to explain what all the scary words mean and how they impact your OTM RH positions along the way. We're going to break it down like this. (1) "What's a hedge, Fuzzy?" (2) Common Hedging Strategies and (3) All About ISDAs and Credit Default Swaps. Before we begin. For the nerds and JV traders in the back (and anyone else who needs to hear this up front) - I am simplifying these descriptions for the purposes of this post. I am also obviously not going to try and cover every exotic form of hedge under the sun or give a detailed summation of what caused the financial crisis. If you are interested in something specific ask a question, but don't try and impress me with your Investopedia skills or technical points I didn't cover; I will just be forced to flex my years of IRL experience on you in the comments and you'll look like a big dummy. TL;DR? Fuck you. There is no TL;DR. You've come this far already. What's a few more paragraphs? Put down the Cheetos and try to concentrate for the next 5-7 minutes. You'll learn something, and I promise I'll be gentle. Ready? Let's get started. 1.The Tao of Risk: Hedging as a Way of Life The simplest way to characterize what a hedge 'is' is to imagine every action having a binary outcome. One is bad, one is good. Red lines, green lines; uppie, downie. With me so far? Good. A 'hedge' is simply the employment of a strategy to mitigate the effect of your action having the wrong binary outcome. You wanted X, but you got Z! Frowny face. A hedge strategy introduces a third outcome. If you hedged against the possibility of Z happening, then you can wind up with Y instead. Not as good as X, but not as bad as Z. The technical definition I like to give my idiot juniors is as follows: Utilization of a defensive strategy to mitigate risk, at a fraction of the cost to capital of the risk itself. Congratulations. You just finished Hedging 101. "But Fuzzy, that's easy! I just sold a naked call against my 95% OTM put! I'm adequately hedged!". Spoiler alert: you're not (although good work on executing a collar, which I describe below). What I'm talking about here is what would be referred to as a 'perfect hedge'; a binary outcome where downside is totally mitigated by a risk management strategy. That's not how it works IRL. Pay attention; this is the tricky part. You can't take a single position and conclude that you're adequately hedged because risks are fluid, not static. So you need to constantly adjust your position in order to maximize the value of the hedge and insure your position. You also need to consider exposure to more than one category of risk. There are micro (specific exposure) risks, and macro (trend exposure) risks, and both need to factor into the hedge calculus. That's why, in the real world, the value of hedging depends entirely on the design of the hedging strategy itself. Here, when we say "value" of the hedge, we're not talking about cash money - we're talking about the intrinsic value of the hedge relative to the the risk profile of your underlying exposure. To achieve this, people hedge dynamically. In wallstreetbets terms, this means that as the value of your position changes, you need to change your hedges too. The idea is to efficiently and continuously distribute and rebalance risk across different states and periods, taking value from states in which the marginal cost of the hedge is low and putting it back into states where marginal cost of the hedge is high, until the shadow value of your underlying exposure is equalized across your positions. The punchline, I guess, is that one static position is a hedge in the same way that the finger paintings you make for your wife's boyfriend are art - it's technically correct, but you're only playing yourself by believing it. Anyway. Obviously doing this as a small potatoes trader is hard but it's worth taking into account. Enough basic shit. So how does this work in markets? 2. A Hedging Taxonomy The best place to start here is a practical question. What does a business need to hedge against? Think about the specific risk that an individual business faces. These are legion, so I'm just going to list a few of the key ones that apply to most corporates. (1) You have commodity risk for the shit you buy or the shit you use. (2) You have currency risk for the money you borrow. (3) You have rate risk on the debt you carry. (4) You have offtake risk for the shit you sell. Complicated, right? To help address the many and varied ways that shit can go wrong in a sophisticated market, smart operators like yours truly have devised a whole bundle of different instruments which can help you manage the risk. I might write about some of the more complicated ones in a later post if people are interested (CDO/CLOs, strip/stack hedges and bond swaps with option toggles come to mind) but let's stick to the basics for now. (i) Swaps A swap is one of the most common forms of hedge instrument, and they're used by pretty much everyone that can afford them. The language is complicated but the concept isn't, so pay attention and you'll be fine. This is the most important part of this section so it'll be the longest one. Swaps are derivative contracts with two counterparties (before you ask, you can't trade 'em on an exchange - they're OTC instruments only). They're used to exchange one cash flow for another cash flow of equal expected value; doing this allows you to take speculative positions on certain financial prices or to alter the cash flows of existing assets or liabilities within a business. "Wait, Fuzz; slow down! What do you mean sets of cash flows?". Fear not, little autist. Ol' Fuzz has you covered. The cash flows I'm talking about are referred to in swap-land as 'legs'. One leg is fixed - a set payment that's the same every time it gets paid - and the other is variable - it fluctuates (typically indexed off the price of the underlying risk that you are speculating on / protecting against). You set it up at the start so that they're notionally equal and the two legs net off; so at open, the swap is a zero NPV instrument. Here's where the fun starts. If the price that you based the variable leg of the swap on changes, the value of the swap will shift; the party on the wrong side of the move ponies up via the variable payment. It's a zero sum game. I'll give you an example using the most vanilla swap around; an interest rate trade. Here's how it works. You borrow money from a bank, and they charge you a rate of interest. You lock the rate up front, because you're smart like that. But then - quelle surprise! - the rate gets better after you borrow. Now you're bagholding to the tune of, I don't know, 5 bps. Doesn't sound like much but on a billion dollar loan that's a lot of money (a classic example of the kind of 'small, deep hole' that's terrible for profits). Now, if you had a swap contract on the rate before you entered the trade, you're set; if the rate goes down, you get a payment under the swap. If it goes up, whatever payment you're making to the bank is netted off by the fact that you're borrowing at a sub-market rate. Win-win! Or, at least, Lose Less / Lose Less. That's the name of the game in hedging. There are many different kinds of swaps, some of which are pretty exotic; but they're all different variations on the same theme. If your business has exposure to something which fluctuates in price, you trade swaps to hedge against the fluctuation. The valuation of swaps is also super interesting but I guarantee you that 99% of you won't understand it so I'm not going to try and explain it here although I encourage you to google it if you're interested. Because they're OTC, none of them are filed publicly. Someeeeeetimes you see an ISDA (dsicussed below) but the confirms themselves (the individual swaps) are not filed. You can usually read about the hedging strategy in a 10-K, though. For what it's worth, most modern credit agreements ban speculative hedging. Top tip: This is occasionally something worth checking in credit agreements when you invest in businesses that are debt issuers - being able to do this increases the risk profile significantly and is particularly important in times of economic volatility (ctrl+f "non-speculative" in the credit agreement to be sure). (ii) Forwards A forward is a contract made today for the future delivery of an asset at a pre-agreed price. That's it. "But Fuzzy! That sounds just like a futures contract!". I know. Confusing, right? Just like a futures trade, forwards are generally used in commodity or forex land to protect against price fluctuations. The differences between forwards and futures are small but significant. I'm not going to go into super boring detail because I don't think many of you are commodities traders but it is still an important thing to understand even if you're just an RH jockey, so stick with me. Just like swaps, forwards are OTC contracts - they're not publicly traded. This is distinct from futures, which are traded on exchanges (see The Ballad Of Big Dick Vick for some more color on this). In a forward, no money changes hands until the maturity date of the contract when delivery and receipt are carried out; price and quantity are locked in from day 1. As you now know having read about BDV, futures are marked to market daily, and normally people close them out with synthetic settlement using an inverse position. They're also liquid, and that makes them easier to unwind or close out in case shit goes sideways. People use forwards when they absolutely have to get rid of the thing they made (or take delivery of the thing they need). If you're a miner, or a farmer, you use this shit to make sure that at the end of the production cycle, you can get rid of the shit you made (and you won't get fucked by someone taking cash settlement over delivery). If you're a buyer, you use them to guarantee that you'll get whatever the shit is that you'll need at a price agreed in advance. Because they're OTC, you can also exactly tailor them to the requirements of your particular circumstances. These contracts are incredibly byzantine (and there are even crazier synthetic forwards you can see in money markets for the true degenerate fund managers). In my experience, only Texan oilfield magnates, commodities traders, and the weirdo forex crowd fuck with them. I (i) do not own a 10 gallon hat or a novelty size belt buckle (ii) do not wake up in the middle of the night freaking out about the price of pork fat and (iii) love greenbacks too much to care about other countries' monopoly money, so I don't fuck with them. (iii) Collars No, not the kind your wife is encouraging you to wear try out to 'spice things up' in the bedroom during quarantine. Collars are actually the hedging strategy most applicable to WSB. Collars deal with options! Hooray! To execute a basic collar (also called a wrapper by tea-drinking Brits and people from the Antipodes), you buy an out of the money put while simultaneously writing a covered call on the same equity. The put protects your position against price drops and writing the call produces income that offsets the put premium. Doing this limits your tendies (you can only profit up to the strike price of the call) but also writes down your risk. If you screen large volume trades with a VOL/OI of more than 3 or 4x (and they're not bullshit biotech stocks), you can sometimes see these being constructed in real time as hedge funds protect themselves on their shorts. (3) All About ISDAs, CDS and Synthetic CDOs You may have heard about the mythical ISDA. Much like an indenture (discussed in my post on $F), it's a magic legal machine that lets you build swaps via trade confirms with a willing counterparty. They are very complicated legal documents and you need to be a true expert to fuck with them. Fortunately, I am, so I do. They're made of two parts; a Master (which is a form agreement that's always the same) and a Schedule (which amends the Master to include your specific terms). They are also the engine behind just about every major credit crunch of the last 10+ years. First - a brief explainer. An ISDA is a not in and of itself a hedge - it's an umbrella contract that governs the terms of your swaps, which you use to construct your hedge position. You can trade commodities, forex, rates, whatever, all under the same ISDA. Let me explain. Remember when we talked about swaps? Right. So. You can trade swaps on just about anything. In the late 90s and early 2000s, people had the smart idea of using other people's debt and or credit ratings as the variable leg of swap documentation. These are called credit default swaps. I was actually starting out at a bank during this time and, I gotta tell you, the only thing I can compare people's enthusiasm for this shit to was that moment in your early teens when you discover jerking off. Except, unlike your bathroom bound shame sessions to Mom's Sears catalogue, every single person you know felt that way too; and they're all doing it at once. It was a fiscal circlejerk of epic proportions, and the financial crisis was the inevitable bukkake finish. WSB autism is absolutely no comparison for the enthusiasm people had during this time for lighting each other's money on fire. Here's how it works. You pick a company. Any company. Maybe even your own! And then you write a swap. In the swap, you define "Credit Event" with respect to that company's debt as the variable leg . And you write in... whatever you want. A ratings downgrade, default under the docs, failure to meet a leverage ratio or FCCR for a certain testing period... whatever. Now, this started out as a hedge position, just like we discussed above. The purest of intentions, of course. But then people realized - if bad shit happens, you make money. And banks... don't like calling in loans or forcing bankruptcies. Can you smell what the moral hazard is cooking? Enter synthetic CDOs. CDOs are basically pools of asset backed securities that invest in debt (loans or bonds). They've been around for a minute but they got famous in the 2000s because a shitload of them containing subprime mortgage debt went belly up in 2008. This got a lot of publicity because a lot of sad looking rednecks got foreclosed on and were interviewed on CNBC. "OH!", the people cried. "Look at those big bad bankers buying up subprime loans! They caused this!". Wrong answer, America. The debt wasn't the problem. What a lot of people don't realize is that the real meat of the problem was not in regular way CDOs investing in bundles of shit mortgage debts in synthetic CDOs investing in CDS predicated on that debt. They're synthetic because they don't have a stake in the actual underlying debt; just the instruments riding on the coattails. The reason these are so popular (and remain so) is that smart structured attorneys and bankers like your faithful correspondent realized that an even more profitable and efficient way of building high yield products with limited downside was investing in instruments that profit from failure of debt and in instruments that rely on that debt and then hedging that exposure with other CDS instruments in paired trades, and on and on up the chain. The problem with doing this was that everyone wound up exposed to everybody else's books as a result, and when one went tits up, everybody did. Hence, recession, Basel III, etc. Thanks, Obama. Heavy investment in CDS can also have a warping effect on the price of debt (something else that happened during the pre-financial crisis years and is starting to happen again now). This happens in three different ways. (1) Investors who previously were long on the debt hedge their position by selling CDS protection on the underlying, putting downward pressure on the debt price. (2) Investors who previously shorted the debt switch to buying CDS protection because the relatively illiquid debt (partic. when its a bond) trades at a discount below par compared to the CDS. The resulting reduction in short selling puts upward pressure on the bond price. (3) The delta in price and actual value of the debt tempts some investors to become NBTs (neg basis traders) who long the debt and purchase CDS protection. If traders can't take leverage, nothing happens to the price of the debt. If basis traders can take leverage (which is nearly always the case because they're holding a hedged position), they can push up or depress the debt price, goosing swap premiums etc. Anyway. Enough technical details. I could keep going. This is a fascinating topic that is very poorly understood and explained, mainly because the people that caused it all still work on the street and use the same tactics today (it's also terribly taught at business schools because none of the teachers were actually around to see how this played out live). But it relates to the topic of today's lesson, so I thought I'd include it here. Work depending, I'll be back next week with a covenant breakdown. Most upvoted ticker gets the post. *EDIT 1\* In a total blowout, $PLAY won. So it's D&B time next week. Post will drop Monday at market open.
Disclaimer: None of this is financial advice. I have no idea what I'm doing. Please do your own research or you will certainly lose money. I'm not a statistician, data scientist, well-seasoned trader, or anything else that would qualify me to make statements such as the below with any weight behind them. Take them for the incoherent ramblings that they are. TL;DR at the bottom for those not interested in the details. This is a bit of a novel, sorry about that. It was mostly for getting my own thoughts organized, but if even one person reads the whole thing I will feel incredibly accomplished.
For those of you not familiar, please see the various threads on this trading system here. I can't take credit for this system, all glory goes to ParallaxFX! I wanted to see how effective this system was at H1 for a couple of reasons: 1) My current broker is TD Ameritrade - their Forex minimum is a mini lot, and I don't feel comfortable enough yet with the risk to trade mini lots on the higher timeframes(i.e. wider pip swings) that ParallaxFX's system uses, so I wanted to see if I could scale it down. 2) I'm fairly impatient, so I don't like to wait days and days with my capital tied up just to see if a trade is going to win or lose. This does mean it requires more active attention since you are checking for setups once an hour instead of once a day or every 4-6 hours, but the upside is that you trade more often this way so you end up winning or losing faster and moving onto the next trade. Spread does eat more of the trade this way, but I'll cover this in my data below - it ends up not being a problem. I looked at data from 6/11 to 7/3 on all pairs with a reasonable spread(pairs listed at bottom above the TL;DR). So this represents about 3-4 weeks' worth of trading. I used mark(mid) price charts. Spreadsheet link is below for anyone that's interested.
I'm pretty much using ParallaxFX's system textbook, but since there are a few options in his writeups, I'll include all the discretionary points here:
I'm using the stop entry version - so I wait for the price to trade beyond the confirmation candle(in the direction of my trade) before entering. I don't have any data to support this decision, but I've always preferred this method over retracement-limit entries. Maybe I just like the feeling of a higher winrate even though there can be greater R:R using a limit entry. Variety is the spice of life.
I put my stop loss right at the opposite edge of the confirmation candle. NOT at the edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. I'll get into this more below - not enough trades are saved to justify the wider stops. (Wider stop means less $ per pip won, assuming you still only risk 1%).
All my profit/loss statistics are based on a 1% risk per trade. Because 1 is real easy to multiply.
There are definitely some questionable trades in here, but I tried to make it as mechanical as possible for evaluation purposes. They do fit the definitions of the system, which is why I included them. You could probably improve the winrate by being more discretionary about your trades by looking at support/resistance or other techniques.
I didn't use MBB much for either entering trades, or as support/resistance indicators. Again, trying to be pretty mechanical here just for data collection purposes. Plus, we all make bad trading decisions now and then, so let's call it even.
As stated in the title, this is for H1 only. These results may very well not play out for other time frames - who knows, it may not even work on H1 starting this Monday. Forex is an unpredictable place.
I collected data to show efficacy of taking profit at three different levels: -61.8%, -100% and -161.8% fib levels described in the system using the passive trade management method(set it and forget it). I'll have more below about moving up stops and taking off portions of a position.
And now for the fun. Results!
Total Trades: 241
TP at -61.8%: 177 out of 241: 73.44%
TP at -100%: 156 out of 241: 64.73%
TP at -161.8%: 121 out of 241: 50.20%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 5.22%
TP at -100%: 23.55%
TP at -161.8%: 29.14%
As you can see, a higher target ended up with higher profit despite a much lower winrate. This is partially just how things work out with profit targets in general, but there's an additional point to consider in our case: the spread. Since we are trading on a lower timeframe, there is less overall price movement and thus the spread takes up a much larger percentage of the trade than it would if you were trading H4, Daily or Weekly charts. You can see exactly how much it accounts for each trade in my spreadsheet if you're interested. TDA does not have the best spreads, so you could probably improve these results with another broker. EDIT: I grabbed typical spreads from other brokers, and turns out while TDA is pretty competitive on majors, their minors/crosses are awful! IG beats them by 20-40% and Oanda beats them 30-60%! Using IG spreads for calculations increased profits considerably (another 5% on top) and Oanda spreads increased profits massively (another 15%!). Definitely going to be considering another broker than TDA for this strategy. Plus that'll allow me to trade micro-lots, so I can be more granular(and thus accurate) with my position sizing and compounding.
A Note on Spread
As you can see in the data, there were scenarios where the spread was 80% of the overall size of the trade(the size of the confirmation candle that you draw your fibonacci retracements over), which would obviously cut heavily into your profits. Removing any trades where the spread is more than 50% of the trade width improved profits slightly without removing many trades, but this is almost certainly just coincidence on a small sample size. Going below 40% and even down to 30% starts to cut out a lot of trades for the less-common pairs, but doesn't actually change overall profits at all(~1% either way). However, digging all the way down to 25% starts to really make some movement. Profit at the -161.8% TP level jumps up to 37.94% if you filter out anything with a spread that is more than 25% of the trade width! And this even keeps the sample size fairly large at 187 total trades. You can get your profits all the way up to 48.43% at the -161.8% TP level if you filter all the way down to only trades where spread is less than 15% of the trade width, however your sample size gets much smaller at that point(108 trades) so I'm not sure I would trust that as being accurate in the long term. Overall based on this data, I'm going to only take trades where the spread is less than 25% of the trade width. This may bias my trades more towards the majors, which would mean a lot more correlated trades as well(more on correlation below), but I think it is a reasonable precaution regardless.
Time of Day
Time of day had an interesting effect on trades. In a totally predictable fashion, a vast majority of setups occurred during the London and New York sessions: 5am-12pm Eastern. However, there was one outlier where there were many setups on the 11PM bar - and the winrate was about the same as the big hours in the London session. No idea why this hour in particular - anyone have any insight? That's smack in the middle of the Tokyo/Sydney overlap, not at the open or close of either. On many of the hour slices I have a feeling I'm just dealing with small number statistics here since I didn't have a lot of data when breaking it down by individual hours. But here it is anyway - for all TP levels, these three things showed up(all in Eastern time):
7pm-4am: Fewer setups, but winrate high.
5am-6am: Lots of setups, but but winrate low.
12pm-3pm Medium number of setups, but winrate low.
I don't have any reason to think these timeframes would maintain this behavior over the long term. They're almost certainly meaningless. EDIT: When you de-dup highly correlated trades, the number of trades in these timeframes really drops, so from this data there is no reason to think these timeframes would be any different than any others in terms of winrate. That being said, these time frames work out for me pretty well because I typically sleep 12am-7am Eastern time. So I automatically avoid the 5am-6am timeframe, and I'm awake for the majority of this system's setups.
Moving stops up to breakeven
This section goes against everything I know and have ever heard about trade management. Please someone find something wrong with my data. I'd love for someone to check my formulas, but I realize that's a pretty insane time commitment to ask of a bunch of strangers. Anyways. What I found was that for these trades moving stops up...basically at all...actually reduced the overall profitability. One of the data points I collected while charting was where the price retraced back to after hitting a certain milestone. i.e. once the price hit the -61.8% profit level, how far back did it retrace before hitting the -100% profit level(if at all)? And same goes for the -100% profit level - how far back did it retrace before hitting the -161.8% profit level(if at all)? Well, some complex excel formulas later and here's what the results appear to be. Emphasis on appears because I honestly don't believe it. I must have done something wrong here, but I've gone over it a hundred times and I can't find anything out of place.
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 5.36%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): -1.01% (yes, a net loss)
Now, you might think exactly what I did when looking at these numbers: oof, the spread killed us there right? Because even when you move your SL to 0%, you still end up paying the spread, so it's not truly "breakeven". And because we are trading on a lower timeframe, the spread can be pretty hefty right? Well even when I manually modified the data so that the spread wasn't subtracted(i.e. "Breakeven" was truly +/- 0), things don't look a whole lot better, and still way worse than the passive trade management method of leaving your stops in place and letting it run. And that isn't even a realistic scenario because to adjust out the spread you'd have to move your stoploss inside the candle edge by at least the spread amount, meaning it would almost certainly be triggered more often than in the data I collected(which was purely based on the fib levels and mark price). Regardless, here are the numbers for that scenario:
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 46.4%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 17.97%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 65.97%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 11.60%
From a literal standpoint, what I see behind this behavior is that 44 of the 69 breakeven trades(65%!) ended up being profitable to -100% after retracing deeply(but not to the original SL level), which greatly helped offset the purely losing trades better than the partial profit taken at -61.8%. And 36 went all the way back to -161.8% after a deep retracement without hitting the original SL. Anyone have any insight into this? Is this a problem with just not enough data? It seems like enough trades that a pattern should emerge, but again I'm no expert. I also briefly looked at moving stops to other lower levels (78.6%, 61.8%, 50%, 38.2%, 23.6%), but that didn't improve things any. No hard data to share as I only took a quick look - and I still might have done something wrong overall. The data is there to infer other strategies if anyone would like to dig in deep(more explanation on the spreadsheet below). I didn't do other combinations because the formulas got pretty complicated and I had already answered all the questions I was looking to answer.
2-Candle vs Confirmation Candle Stops
Another interesting point is that the original system has the SL level(for stop entries) just at the outer edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. Out of pure laziness, I set up my stops just based on the confirmation candle. And as it turns out, that is much a much better way to go about it. Of the 60 purely losing trades, only 9 of them(15%) would go on to be winners with stops on the 2-candle formation. Certainly not enough to justify the extra loss and/or reduced profits you are exposing yourself to in every single other trade by setting a wider SL. Oddly, in every single scenario where the wider stop did save the trade, it ended up going all the way to the -161.8% profit level. Still, not nearly worth it.
As I've said many times now, I'm really not qualified to be doing an analysis like this. This section in particular. Looking at shared currency among the pairs traded, 74 of the trades are correlated. Quite a large group, but it makes sense considering the sort of moves we're looking for with this system. This means you are opening yourself up to more risk if you were to trade on every signal since you are technically trading with the same underlying sentiment on each different pair. For example, GBP/USD and AUD/USD moving together almost certainly means it's due to USD moving both pairs, rather than GBP and AUD both moving the same size and direction coincidentally at the same time. So if you were to trade both signals, you would very likely win or lose both trades - meaning you are actually risking double what you'd normally risk(unless you halve both positions which can be a good option, and is discussed in ParallaxFX's posts and in various other places that go over pair correlation. I won't go into detail about those strategies here). Interestingly though, 17 of those apparently correlated trades ended up with different wins/losses. Also, looking only at trades that were correlated, winrate is 83%/70%/55% (for the three TP levels). Does this give some indication that the same signal on multiple pairs means the signal is stronger? That there's some strong underlying sentiment driving it? Or is it just a matter of too small a sample size? The winrate isn't really much higher than the overall winrates, so that makes me doubt it is statistically significant. One more funny tidbit: EUCAD netted the lowest overall winrate: 30% to even the -61.8% TP level on 10 trades. Seems like that is just a coincidence and not enough data, but dang that's a sucky losing streak. EDIT: WOW I spent some time removing correlated trades manually and it changed the results quite a bit. Some thoughts on this below the results. These numbers also include the other "What I will trade" filters. I added a new worksheet to my data to show what I ended up picking.
Total Trades: 75
TP at -61.8%: 84.00%
TP at -100%: 73.33%
TP at -161.8%: 60.00%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 53.33%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 53.33% (yes, oddly the exact same winrate. but different trades/profits)
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 18.13%
TP at -100%: 26.20%
TP at -161.8%: 34.01%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 19.20%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 17.29%
To do this, I removed correlated trades - typically by choosing those whose spread had a lower % of the trade width since that's objective and something I can see ahead of time. Obviously I'd like to only keep the winning trades, but I won't know that during the trade. This did reduce the overall sample size down to a level that I wouldn't otherwise consider to be big enough, but since the results are generally consistent with the overall dataset, I'm not going to worry about it too much. I may also use more discretionary methods(support/resistance, quality of indecision/confirmation candles, news/sentiment for the pairs involved, etc) to filter out correlated trades in the future. But as I've said before I'm going for a pretty mechanical system. This brought the 3 TP levels and even the breakeven strategies much closer together in overall profit. It muted the profit from the high R:R strategies and boosted the profit from the low R:R strategies. This tells me pair correlation was skewing my data quite a bit, so I'm glad I dug in a little deeper. Fortunately my original conclusion to use the -161.8 TP level with static stops is still the winner by a good bit, so it doesn't end up changing my actions. There were a few times where MANY (6-8) correlated pairs all came up at the same time, so it'd be a crapshoot to an extent. And the data showed this - often then won/lost together, but sometimes they did not. As an arbitrary rule, the more correlations, the more trades I did end up taking(and thus risking). For example if there were 3-5 correlations, I might take the 2 "best" trades given my criteria above. 5+ setups and I might take the best 3 trades, even if the pairs are somewhat correlated. I have no true data to back this up, but to illustrate using one example: if AUD/JPY, AUD/USD, CAD/JPY, USD/CAD all set up at the same time (as they did, along with a few other pairs on 6/19/20 9:00 AM), can you really say that those are all the same underlying movement? There are correlations between the different correlations, and trying to filter for that seems rough. Although maybe this is a known thing, I'm still pretty green to Forex - someone please enlighten me if so! I might have to look into this more statistically, but it would be pretty complex to analyze quantitatively, so for now I'm going with my gut and just taking a few of the "best" trades out of the handful. Overall, I'm really glad I went further on this. The boosting of the B/E strategies makes me trust my calculations on those more since they aren't so far from the passive management like they were with the raw data, and that really had me wondering what I did wrong.
What I will trade
Putting all this together, I am going to attempt to trade the following(demo for a bit to make sure I have the hang of it, then for keeps):
"System Details" I described above.
TP at -161.8%
Static SL at opposite side of confirmation candle - I won't move stops up to breakeven.
Trade only 7am-11am and 4pm-11pm signals.
Nothing where spread is more than 25% of trade width.
Looking at the data for these rules, test results are:
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
I'll be sure to let everyone know how it goes!
Other Technical Details
ATR is only slightly elevated in this date range from historical levels, so this should fairly closely represent reality even after the COVID volatility leaves the scalpers sad and alone.
The sample size is much too small for anything really meaningful when you slice by hour or pair. I wasn't particularly looking to test a specific pair here - just the system overall as if you were going to trade it on all pairs with a reasonable spread.
Here's the spreadsheet for anyone that'd like it. (EDIT: Updated some of the setups from the last few days that have fully played out now. I also noticed a few typos, but nothing major that would change the overall outcomes. Regardless, I am currently reviewing every trade to ensure they are accurate.UPDATE: Finally all done. Very few corrections, no change to results.) I have some explanatory notes below to help everyone else understand the spiraled labyrinth of a mind that put the spreadsheet together.
I'm on the East Coast in the US, so the timestamps are Eastern time.
Time stamp is from the confirmation candle, not the indecision candle. So 7am would mean the indecision candle was 6:00-6:59 and the confirmation candle is 7:00-7:59 and you'd put in your order at 8:00.
I found a couple AM/PM typos as I was reviewing the data, so let me know if a trade doesn't make sense and I'll correct it.
Insanely detailed spreadsheet notes
For you real nerds out there. Here's an explanation of what each column means:
Pair - duh
Date/Time - Eastern time, confirmation candle as stated above
Win to -61.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -61.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -100%? - whether the trade made it to the -100% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -161.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -161.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -61.8% and -100% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -61.8%, but before hitting -100%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -61.8% to -100%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -100% and -161.8% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -100%, but before hitting -161.8%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -100% to -161.8%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Trade Width(Pips) - the size of the confirmation candle, and thus the "width" of your trade on which to determine position size, draw fib levels, etc.
Loser saved by 2 candle stop? - for all losing trades, whether or not the 2-candle stop loss would have saved the trade and how far it ended up getting if so. "No" means it didn't save it, N/A means it wasn't a losing trade so it's not relevant.
Spread(ThinkorSwim) - these are typical spreads for these pairs on ToS.
Spread % of Width - How big is the spread compared to the trade width? Not used in any calculations, but interesting nonetheless.
True Risk(Trade Width + Spread) - I set my SL at the opposite side of the confirmation candle knowing that I'm actually exposing myself to slightly more risk because of the spread(stop order = market order when submitted, so you pay the spread). So this tells you how many pips you are actually risking despite the Trade Width. I prefer this over setting the stop inside from the edge of the candle because some pairs have a wide spread that would mess with the system overall. But also many, many of these trades retraced very nearly to the edge of the confirmation candle, before ending up nicely profitable. If you keep your risk per trade at 1%, you're talking a true risk of, at most, 1.25% (in worst-case scenarios with the spread being 25% of the trade width as I am going with above).
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -61.8% - not going to go into huge detail, see the spreadsheet for calculations if you want. But, in a nutshell, if the trade was a win to 61.8%, it returns a positive # based on 61.8% of the trade width, minus the spread. Otherwise, it returns the True Risk as a negative. Both normalized to the 1% risk you started with.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100% - same as the last, but 100% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -161.8% - same as the last, but 161.8% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100%, and move SL to breakeven at 61.8% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then full TP at 100%.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread take off half of position at -61.8%, move SL to breakeven, TP 100% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you took of half the position and moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then TP the remaining half at 100%.
Overall Growth(-161.8% TP, 1% Risk) - pretty straightforward. Assuming you risked 1% on each trade, what the overall growth level would be chronologically(spreadsheet is sorted by date).
Based on the reasonable rules I discovered in this backtest:
Date range: 6/11-7/3
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
Demo Trading Results
Since this post, I started demo trading this system assuming a 5k capital base and risking ~1% per trade. I've added the details to my spreadsheet for anyone interested. The results are pretty similar to the backtest when you consider real-life conditions/timing are a bit different. I missed some trades due to life(work, out of the house, etc), so that brought my total # of trades and thus overall profit down, but the winrate is nearly identical. I also closed a few trades early due to various reasons(not liking the price action, seeing support/resistance emerge, etc). A quick note is that TD's paper trade system fills at the mid price for both stop and limit orders, so I had to subtract the spread from the raw trade values to get the true profit/loss amount for each trade. I'm heading out of town next week, then after that it'll be time to take this sucker live!
Date range: 7/9-7/30
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 20.73%
Starting Balance: $5,000
Ending Balance: $6,036.51
Live Trading Results
I started live-trading this system on 8/10, and almost immediately had a string of losses much longer than either my backtest or demo period. Murphy's law huh? Anyways, that has me spooked so I'm doing a longer backtest before I start risking more real money. It's going to take me a little while due to the volume of trades, but I'll likely make a new post once I feel comfortable with that and start live trading again.
Former investment bank FX trader: Risk management part 3/3
Welcome to the third and final part of this chapter. Thank you all for the 100s of comments and upvotes - maybe this post will take us above 1,000 for this topic! Keep any feedback or questions coming in the replies below. Before you read this note, please start with Part I and then Part II so it hangs together and makes sense. Part III
Squeezes and other risks
Crap trades, timeouts and monthly limits
Squeezes and other risks
We are going to cover three common risks that traders face: events; squeezes, asymmetric bets.
Economic releases can cause large short-term volatility. The most famous is Non Farm Payrolls, which is the most widely watched measure of US employment levels and affects the price of many instruments.On an NFP announcement currencies like EURUSD might jump (or drop) 100 pips no problem. This is fine and there are trading strategies that one may employ around this but the key thing is to be aware of these releases.You can find economic calendars all over the internet - including on this site - and you need only check if there are any major releases each day or week. For example, if you are trading off some intraday chart and scalping a few pips here and there it would be highly sensible to go into a known data release flat as it is pure coin-toss and not the reason for your trading. It only takes five minutes each day to plan for the day ahead so do not get caught out by this. Many retail traders get stopped out on such events when price volatility is at its peak.
Short squeezes bring a lot of danger and perhaps some opportunity. The story of VW and Porsche is the best short squeeze ever. Throughout these articles we've used FX examples wherever possible but in this one instance the concept (which is also highly relevant in FX) is best illustrated with an historical lesson from a different asset class. A short squeeze is when a participant ends up in a short position they are forced to cover. Especially when the rest of the market knows that this participant can be bullied into stopping out at terrible levels, provided the market can briefly drive the price into their pain zone. There's a reason for the car, don't worry Hedge funds had been shorting VW stock. However the amount of VW stock available to buy in the open market was actually quite limited. The local government owned a chunk and Porsche itself had bought and locked away around 30%. Neither of these would sell to the hedge-funds so a good amount of the stock was un-buyable at any price. If you sell or short a stock you must be prepared to buy it back to go flat at some point. To cut a long story short, Porsche bought a lot of call options on VW stock. These options gave them the right to purchase VW stock from banks at slightly above market price. Eventually the banks who had sold these options realised there was no VW stock to go out and buy since the German government wouldn’t sell its allocation and Porsche wouldn’t either. If Porsche called in the options the banks were in trouble. Porsche called in the options which forced the shorts to buy stock - at whatever price they could get it. The price squeezed higher as those that were short got massively squeezed and stopped out. For one brief moment in 2008, VW was the world’s most valuable company. Shorts were burned hard. Incredible event Porsche apparently made $11.5 billion on the trade. The BBC described Porsche as “a hedge fund with a carmaker attached.” If this all seems exotic then know that the same thing happens in FX all the time. If everyone in the market is talking about a key level in EURUSD being 1.2050 then you can bet the market will try to push through 1.2050 just to take out any short stops at that level. Whether it then rallies higher or fails and trades back lower is a different matter entirely. This brings us on to the matter of crowded trades. We will look at positioning in more detail in the next section. Crowded trades are dangerous for PNL. If everyone believes EURUSD is going down and has already sold EURUSD then you run the risk of a short squeeze. For additional selling to take place you need a very good reason for people to add to their position whereas a move in the other direction could force mass buying to cover their shorts. A trading mentor when I worked at the investment bank once advised me: Always think about which move would cause the maximum people the maximum pain. That move is precisely what you should be watching out for at all times.
Also known as picking up pennies in front of a steamroller. This risk has caught out many a retail trader. Sometimes it is referred to as a "negative skew" strategy. Ideally what you are looking for is asymmetric risk trade set-ups: that is where the downside is clearly defined and smaller than the upside. What you want to avoid is the opposite. A famous example of this going wrong was the Swiss National Bank de-peg in 2012. The Swiss National Bank had said they would defend the price of EURCHF so that it did not go below 1.2. Many people believed it could never go below 1.2 due to this. Many retail traders therefore opted for a strategy that some describe as ‘picking up pennies in front of a steam-roller’. They would would buy EURCHF above the peg level and hope for a tiny rally of several pips before selling them back and keep doing this repeatedly. Often they were highly leveraged at 100:1 so that they could amplify the profit of the tiny 5-10 pip rally. Then this happened. Something that changed FX markets forever The SNB suddenly did the unthinkable. They stopped defending the price. CHF jumped and so EURCHF (the number of CHF per 1 EUR) dropped to new lows very fast. Clearly, this trade had horrific risk : reward asymmetry: you risked 30% to make 0.05%. Other strategies like naively selling options have the same result. You win a small amount of money each day and then spectacularly blow up at some point down the line.
We have talked about short squeezes. But how do you know what the market position is? And should you care? Let’s start with the first. You should definitely care. Let’s imagine the entire market is exceptionally long EURUSD and positioning reaches extreme levels. This makes EURUSD very vulnerable. To keep the price going higher EURUSD needs to attract fresh buy orders. If everyone is already long and has no room to add, what can incentivise people to keep buying? The news flow might be good. They may believe EURUSD goes higher. But they have already bought and have their maximum position on. On the flip side, if there’s an unexpected event and EURUSD gaps lower you will have the entire market trying to exit the position at the same time. Like a herd of cows running through a single doorway. Messy. We are going to look at this in more detail in a later chapter, where we discuss ‘carry’ trades. For now this TRYJPY chart might provide some idea of what a rush to the exits of a crowded position looks like. A carry trade position clear-out in action Knowing if the market is currently at extreme levels of long or short can therefore be helpful. The CFTC makes available a weekly report, which details the overall positions of speculative traders “Non Commercial Traders” in some of the major futures products. This includes futures tied to deliverable FX pairs such as EURUSD as well as products such as gold. The report is called “CFTC Commitments of Traders” ("COT"). This is a great benchmark. It is far more representative of the overall market than the proprietary ones offered by retail brokers as it covers a far larger cross-section of the institutional market. Generally market participants will not pay a lot of attention to commercial hedgers, which are also detailed in the report. This data is worth tracking but these folks are simply hedging real-world transactions rather than speculating so their activity is far less revealing and far more noisy. You can find the data online for free and download it directly here. Raw format is kinda hard to work with However, many websites will chart this for you free of charge and you may find it more convenient to look at it that way. Just google “CFTC positioning charts”. But you can easily get visualisations You can visually spot extreme positioning. It is extremely powerful. Bear in mind the reports come out Friday afternoon US time and the report is a snapshot up to the prior Tuesday. That means it is a lagged report - by the time it is released it is a few days out of date. For longer term trades where you hold positions for weeks this is of course still pretty helpful information. As well as the absolute level (is the speculative market net long or short) you can also use this to pick up on changes in positioning. For example if bad news comes out how much does the net short increase? If good news comes out, the market may remain net short but how much did they buy back? A lot of traders ask themselves “Does the market have this trade on?” The positioning data is a good method for answering this. It provides a good finger on the pulse of the wider market sentiment and activity. For example you might say: “There was lots of noise about the good employment numbers in the US. However, there wasn’t actually a lot of position change on the back of it. Maybe everyone who wants to buy already has. What would happen now if bad news came out?” In general traders will be wary of entering a crowded position because it will be hard to attract additional buyers or sellers and there could be an aggressive exit. If you want to enter a trade that is showing extreme levels of positioning you must think carefully about this dynamic.
Retail traders often drastically underestimate how correlated their bets are. Through bitter experience, I have learned that a mistake in position correlation is the root of some of the most serious problems in trading. If you have eight highly correlated positions, then you are really trading one position that is eight times as large. Bruce Kovner of hedge fund, Caxton Associates For example, if you are trading a bunch of pairs against the USD you will end up with a simply huge USD exposure. A single USD-trigger can ruin all your bets. Your ideal scenario — and it isn’t always possible — would be to have a highly diversified portfolio of bets that do not move in tandem. Look at this chart. Inverted USD index (DXY) is green. AUDUSD is orange. EURUSD is blue. Chart from TradingView So the whole thing is just one big USD trade! If you are long AUDUSD, long EURUSD, and short DXY you have three anti USD bets that are all likely to work or fail together. The more diversified your portfolio of bets are, the more risk you can take on each. There’s a really good video, explaining the benefits of diversification from Ray Dalio. A systematic fund with access to an investable universe of 10,000 instruments has more opportunity to make a better risk-adjusted return than a trader who only focuses on three symbols. Diversification really is the closest thing to a free lunch in finance. But let’s be pragmatic and realistic. Human retail traders don’t have capacity to run even one hundred bets at a time. More realistic would be an average of 2-3 trades on simultaneously. So what can be done? For example:
You might diversify across time horizons by having a mix of short-term and long-term trades.
You might diversify across asset classes - trading some FX but also crypto and equities.
You might diversify your trade generation approach so you are not relying on the same indicators or drivers on each trade.
You might diversify your exposure to the market regime by having some trades that assume a trend will continue (momentum) and some that assume we will be range-bound (carry).
And so on. Basically you want to scan your portfolio of trades and make sure you are not putting all your eggs in one basket. If some trades underperform others will perform - assuming the bets are not correlated - and that way you can ensure your overall portfolio takes less risk per unit of return. The key thing is to start thinking about a portfolio of bets and what each new trade offers to your existing portfolio of risk. Will it diversify or amplify a current exposure?
Crap trades, timeouts and monthly limits
One common mistake is to get bored and restless and put on crap trades. This just means trades in which you have low conviction. It is perfectly fine not to trade. If you feel like you do not understand the market at a particular point, simply choose not to trade. Flat is a position. Do not waste your bullets on rubbish trades. Only enter a trade when you have carefully considered it from all angles and feel good about the risk. This will make it far easier to hold onto the trade if it moves against you at any point. You actually believe in it. Equally, you need to set monthly limits. A standard limit might be a 10% account balance stop per month. At that point you close all your positions immediately and stop trading till next month. Be strict with yourself and walk away Let’s assume you started the year with $100k and made 5% in January so enter Feb with $105k balance. Your stop is therefore 10% of $105k or $10.5k . If your account balance dips to $94.5k ($105k-$10.5k) then you stop yourself out and don’t resume trading till March the first. Having monthly calendar breaks is nice for another reason. Say you made a load of money in January. You don’t want to start February feeling you are up 5% or it is too tempting to avoid trading all month and protect the existing win. Each month and each year should feel like a clean slate and an independent period. Everyone has trading slumps. It is perfectly normal. It will definitely happen to you at some stage. The trick is to take a break and refocus. Conserve your capital by not trading a lot whilst you are on a losing streak. This period will be much harder for you emotionally and you’ll end up making suboptimal decisions. An enforced break will help you see the bigger picture. Put in place a process before you start trading and then it’ll be easy to follow and will feel much less emotional. Remember: the market doesn’t care if you win or lose, it is nothing personal. When your head has cooled and you feel calm you return the next month and begin the task of building back your account balance.
That's a wrap on risk management
Thanks for taking time to read this three-part chapter on risk management. I hope you enjoyed it. Do comment in the replies if you have any questions or feedback. Remember: the most important part of trading is not making money. It is not losing money. Always start with that principle. I hope these three notes have provided some food for thought on how you might approach risk management and are of practical use to you when trading. Avoiding mistakes is not a sexy tagline but it is an effective and reliable way to improve results. Next up I will be writing about an exciting topic I think many traders should look at rather differently: news trading. Please follow on here to receive notifications and the broad outline is below. News Trading Part I
Why use the economic calendar
Reading the economic calendar
Knowing what's priced in
First order thinking vs second order thinking
News Trading Part II
Preparing for quantitative and qualitative releases
Data surprise index
Using recent events to predict future reactions
Buy the rumour, sell the fact
The mysterious 'position trim' effect
Some key FX releases
*** Disclaimer:This content is not investment advice and you should not place any reliance on it. The views expressed are the author's own and should not be attributed to any other person, including their employer.
https://eu.excentral.com/blog-article/?articleId=33121 There are many ways to trade, but there are just a few ways to open a transaction correctly. And this is one way you wouldn’t want to miss. Buckle up for a blog full of trading insight and eye-opening tips, straight from the trading world. All traders, from the less all the way to the highly experienced ones should read this blog to advance their game. Needless to say, if you’re relatively new to the world of trading, this is a blog post you should definitely read. It includes the steps you need to take to open a transaction, weighing in the facts and data you gather from trustworthy sources. However, if you’re trading like most people are breathing, then this is a blog post you might also benefit from reading, from the fact that it will give you a chance to reassess the most basic steps of trading, from a knowledgeable point of view. Read this if you want to upgrade your strategies, checking the news and what are some verified news-sources, following the economic releases calendars, all the way to ‘reading’ the charts.
Here’s what you’ll better do
Make sure you find a piece of news on an asset you understand – you can choose pretty much everything, from your country’s currency, main commodities products, indices, famous shares or even cryptocurrencies –we've got over 120 such assets. Just make sure you understand its current trend and what might impact it in the coming future. Make sure you find verified news outlets like: Reuters, Bloomberg, Investing, Business Insider, Financial Times, Market Watch, Forex Factory etc.
Check the chart (try adding some indicators) – the chart will tell you more about the trend of the asset up to the moment you’re checking it. If you’re a more analytical trader, you might get the whole picture and base your trades on the chart solely. If you’re good with indicators, try combining several, to double-check your assets.
Check the Economic Calendar for any upcoming events that impact the asset’s trend – If the chart doesn’t quite paint the picture, try combining it with the economic calendar. As an exercise, try to see which events trigger what kind of movement. Although past events can’t be an indication of future trends, they help you practice and better understand an asset’s movements.
Keep in mind that these first three steps are interchangeable. You can even start backwards, or first from the Chart, as they serve as verification methods of one another. Experienced traders can even make sense of asset’s trends using just one of these steps. But you know what they say: practice makes perfect.
A simple analysis might not be enough
Make sure you have enough margin to pursue the trades you’re planning – based on the leverage you’re using, you might hear that a handful of investors recommend using 20% of your available margin, leaving the rest as a safety net in case your scenario goes haywire. However, the truth is somewhere in the middle. You need to consider the volatility of the assets you’re trading with, the total margin available in your account as well as all the events taking place in the markets at that specific time when you’ll open the transaction.
Prepare a solid Risk Management Technique – there’s no one-size-fits all strategy we can use when trading, and actively following our transactions seems to be the best solution we have. Probably only a good Risk Handling Technique can prevail, so make sure to research yours in depth.
Analyse the right entry and exit strategies for a variety of scenarios. It’s not all about setting up stop loss and take profit. Consider the period you’re willing to hold the transaction open for, the events that might start influencing the trend, or whether you’re planning on changing the stop limits at all. For more information make sure to check out Michalis Webinars.
Don’t forget to invest in your knowledge and…
Trade – based on what you expect to happen next in the markets, buy – if you anticipate the asset’s value to rise, or sell – if you think the asset’s value will drop.
If any of the above points give you a headache, make sure you follow ourwebinars, held by eXcentral’s Market Analyst, Michalis Efthymiou. And for more information make sure to ask your Account Manager to arrange a 1-on-1 with Michalis, it might surprise you how much he knows about investing.
Capitalism is an economic system in which private individuals or businesses own capital goods. The production of goods and services is based on supply and demand in the general market—known as a market economy—rather than through central planning—known as a planned economy or command economy. The purest form of capitalism is free market or laissez-faire capitalism. Here, private individuals are unrestrained. They may determine where to invest, what to produce or sell, and at which prices to exchange goods and services. The laissez-faire marketplace operates without checks or controls. Today, most countries practice a mixed capitalist system that includes some degree of government regulation of business and ownership of select industries. Volume 75% 2:05
Functionally speaking, capitalism is one process by which the problems of economic production and resource distribution might be resolved. Instead of planning economic decisions through centralized political methods, as with socialism or feudalism, economic planning under capitalism occurs via decentralized and voluntary decisions.
Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private ownership of the means of production, especially in the industrial sector.
Capitalism depends on the enforcement of private property rights, which provide incentives for investment in and productive use of productive capital.
Capitalism developed historically out of previous systems of feudalism and mercantilism in Europe, and dramatically expanded industrialization and the large-scale availability of mass-market consumer goods.
Pure capitalism can be contrasted with pure socialism (where all means of production are collective or state-owned) and mixed economies (which lie on a continuum between pure capitalism and pure socialism).
The real-world practice of capitalism typically involves some degree of so-called “crony capitalism” due to demands from business for favorable government intervention and governments’ incentive to intervene in the economy.
Capitalism and Private Property
Private property rights are fundamental to capitalism. Most modern concepts of private property stem from John Locke's theory of homesteading, in which human beings claim ownership through mixing their labor with unclaimed resources. Once owned, the only legitimate means of transferring property are through voluntary exchange, gifts, inheritance, or re-homesteading of abandoned property. Private property promotes efficiency by giving the owner of resources an incentive to maximize the value of their property. So, the more valuable the resource is, the more trading power it provides the owner. In a capitalist system, the person who owns the property is entitled to any value associated with that property. For individuals or businesses to deploy their capital goods confidently, a system must exist that protects their legal right to own or transfer private property. A capitalist society will rely on the use of contracts, fair dealing, and tort law to facilitate and enforce these private property rights. When a property is not privately owned but shared by the public, a problem known as the tragedy of the commons can emerge. With a common pool resource, which all people can use, and none can limit access to, all individuals have an incentive to extract as much use value as they can and no incentive to conserve or reinvest in the resource. Privatizing the resource is one possible solution to this problem, along with various voluntary or involuntary collective action approaches.
Capitalism, Profits, and Losses
Profits are closely associated with the concept of private property. By definition, an individual only enters into a voluntary exchange of private property when they believe the exchange benefits them in some psychic or material way. In such trades, each party gains extra subjective value, or profit, from the transaction. Voluntary trade is the mechanism that drives activity in a capitalist system. The owners of resources compete with one another over consumers, who in turn, compete with other consumers over goods and services. All of this activity is built into the price system, which balances supply and demand to coordinate the distribution of resources. A capitalist earns the highest profit by using capital goods most efficiently while producing the highest-value good or service. In this system, information about what is highest-valued is transmitted through those prices at which another individual voluntarily purchases the capitalist's good or service. Profits are an indication that less valuable inputs have been transformed into more valuable outputs. By contrast, the capitalist suffers losses when capital resources are not used efficiently and instead create less valuable outputs.
Free Enterprise or Capitalism?
Capitalism and free enterprise are often seen as synonymous. In truth, they are closely related yet distinct terms with overlapping features. It is possible to have a capitalist economy without complete free enterprise, and possible to have a free market without capitalism. Any economy is capitalist as long as private individuals control the factors of production. However, a capitalist system can still be regulated by government laws, and the profits of capitalist endeavors can still be taxed heavily. "Free enterprise" can roughly be understood to mean economic exchanges free of coercive government influence. Although unlikely, it is possible to conceive of a system where individuals choose to hold all property rights in common. Private property rights still exist in a free enterprise system, although the private property may be voluntarily treated as communal without a government mandate. Many Native American tribes existed with elements of these arrangements, and within a broader capitalist economic family, clubs, co-ops, and joint-stock business firms like partnerships or corporations are all examples of common property institutions. If accumulation, ownership, and profiting from capital is the central principle of capitalism, then freedom from state coercion is the central principle of free enterprise.
Feudalism the Root of Capitalism
Capitalism grew out of European feudalism. Up until the 12th century, less than 5% of the population of Europe lived in towns. Skilled workers lived in the city but received their keep from feudal lords rather than a real wage, and most workers were serfs for landed nobles. However, by the late Middle Ages rising urbanism, with cities as centers of industry and trade, become more and more economically important. The advent of true wages offered by the trades encouraged more people to move into towns where they could get money rather than subsistence in exchange for labor. Families’ extra sons and daughters who needed to be put to work, could find new sources of income in the trade towns. Child labor was as much a part of the town's economic development as serfdom was part of the rural life.
Mercantilism Replaces Feudalism
Mercantilism gradually replaced the feudal economic system in Western Europe and became the primary economic system of commerce during the 16th to 18th centuries. Mercantilism started as trade between towns, but it was not necessarily competitive trade. Initially, each town had vastly different products and services that were slowly homogenized by demand over time. After the homogenization of goods, trade was carried out in broader and broader circles: town to town, county to county, province to province, and, finally, nation to nation. When too many nations were offering similar goods for trade, the trade took on a competitive edge that was sharpened by strong feelings of nationalism in a continent that was constantly embroiled in wars. Colonialism flourished alongside mercantilism, but the nations seeding the world with settlements were not trying to increase trade. Most colonies were set up with an economic system that smacked of feudalism, with their raw goods going back to the motherland and, in the case of the British colonies in North America, being forced to repurchase the finished product with a pseudo-currency that prevented them from trading with other nations. It was Adam Smith who noticed that mercantilism was not a force of development and change, but a regressive system that was creating trade imbalances between nations and keeping them from advancing. His ideas for a free market opened the world to capitalism.
Growth of Industrial Capitalism
Smith's ideas were well-timed, as the Industrial Revolution was starting to cause tremors that would soon shake the Western world. The (often literal) gold mine of colonialism had brought new wealth and new demand for the products of domestic industries, which drove the expansion and mechanization of production. As technology leaped ahead and factories no longer had to be built near waterways or windmills to function, industrialists began building in the cities where there were now thousands of people to supply ready labor. Industrial tycoons were the first people to amass their wealth in their lifetimes, often outstripping both the landed nobles and many of the money lending/banking families. For the first time in history, common people could have hopes of becoming wealthy. The new money crowd built more factories that required more labor, while also producing more goods for people to purchase. During this period, the term "capitalism"—originating from the Latin word "capitalis," which means "head of cattle"—was first used by French socialist Louis Blanc in 1850, to signify a system of exclusive ownership of industrial means of production by private individuals rather than shared ownership. Contrary to popular belief, Karl Marx did not coin the word "capitalism," although he certainly contributed to the rise of its use.
Industrial Capitalism's Effects
Industrial capitalism tended to benefit more levels of society rather than just the aristocratic class. Wages increased, helped greatly by the formation of unions. The standard of living also increased with the glut of affordable products being mass-produced. This growth led to the formation of a middle class and began to lift more and more people from the lower classes to swell its ranks. The economic freedoms of capitalism matured alongside democratic political freedoms, liberal individualism, and the theory of natural rights. This unified maturity is not to say, however, that all capitalist systems are politically free or encourage individual liberty. Economist Milton Friedman, an advocate of capitalism and individual liberty, wrote in Capitalism and Freedom (1962) that "capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom. It is not a sufficient condition." A dramatic expansion of the financial sector accompanied the rise of industrial capitalism. Banks had previously served as warehouses for valuables, clearinghouses for long-distance trade, or lenders to nobles and governments. Now they came to serve the needs of everyday commerce and the intermediation of credit for large, long-term investment projects. By the 20th century, as stock exchanges became increasingly public and investment vehicles opened up to more individuals, some economists identified a variation on the system: financial capitalism.
Capitalism and Economic Growth
By creating incentives for entrepreneurs to reallocate away resources from unprofitable channels and into areas where consumers value them more highly, capitalism has proven a highly effective vehicle for economic growth. Before the rise of capitalism in the 18th and 19th centuries, rapid economic growth occurred primarily through conquest and extraction of resources from conquered peoples. In general, this was a localized, zero-sum process. Research suggests average global per-capita income was unchanged between the rise of agricultural societies through approximately 1750 when the roots of the first Industrial Revolution took hold. In subsequent centuries, capitalist production processes have greatly enhanced productive capacity. More and better goods became cheaply accessible to wide populations, raising standards of living in previously unthinkable ways. As a result, most political theorists and nearly all economists argue that capitalism is the most efficient and productive system of exchange.
Capitalism vs. Socialism
In terms of political economy, capitalism is often pitted against socialism. The fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism is the ownership and control of the means of production. In a capitalist economy, property and businesses are owned and controlled by individuals. In a socialist economy, the state owns and manages the vital means of production. However, other differences also exist in the form of equity, efficiency, and employment.
The capitalist economy is unconcerned about equitable arrangements. The argument is that inequality is the driving force that encourages innovation, which then pushes economic development. The primary concern of the socialist model is the redistribution of wealth and resources from the rich to the poor, out of fairness, and to ensure equality in opportunity and equality of outcome. Equality is valued above high achievement, and the collective good is viewed above the opportunity for individuals to advance.
The capitalist argument is that the profit incentive drives corporations to develop innovative new products that are desired by the consumer and have demand in the marketplace. It is argued that the state ownership of the means of production leads to inefficiency because, without the motivation to earn more money, management, workers, and developers are less likely to put forth the extra effort to push new ideas or products.
In a capitalist economy, the state does not directly employ the workforce. This lack of government-run employment can lead to unemployment during economic recessions and depressions. In a socialist economy, the state is the primary employer. During times of economic hardship, the socialist state can order hiring, so there is full employment. Also, there tends to be a stronger "safety net" in socialist systems for workers who are injured or permanently disabled. Those who can no longer work have fewer options available to help them in capitalist societies.
Mixed System vs. Pure Capitalism
When the government owns some but not all of the means of production, but government interests may legally circumvent, replace, limit, or otherwise regulate private economic interests, that is said to be a mixed economy or mixed economic system. A mixed economy respects property rights, but places limits on them. Property owners are restricted with regards to how they exchange with one another. These restrictions come in many forms, such as minimum wage laws, tariffs, quotas, windfall taxes, license restrictions, prohibited products or contracts, direct public expropriation, anti-trust legislation, legal tender laws, subsidies, and eminent domain. Governments in mixed economies also fully or partly own and operate certain industries, especially those considered public goods, often enforcing legally binding monopolies in those industries to prohibit competition by private entities. In contrast, pure capitalism, also known as laissez-faire capitalism or anarcho-capitalism, (such as professed by Murray N. Rothbard) all industries are left up to private ownership and operation, including public goods, and no central government authority provides regulation or supervision of economic activity in general. The standard spectrum of economic systems places laissez-faire capitalism at one extreme and a complete planned economy—such as communism—at the other. Everything in the middle could be said to be a mixed economy. The mixed economy has elements of both central planning and unplanned private business. By this definition, nearly every country in the world has a mixed economy, but contemporary mixed economies range in their levels of government intervention. The U.S. and the U.K. have a relatively pure type of capitalism with a minimum of federal regulation in financial and labor markets—sometimes known as Anglo-Saxon capitalism—while Canada and the Nordic countries have created a balance between socialism and capitalism. Many European nations practice welfare capitalism, a system that is concerned with the social welfare of the worker, and includes such policies as state pensions, universal healthcare, collective bargaining, and industrial safety codes.
Crony capitalism refers to a capitalist society that is based on the close relationships between business people and the state. Instead of success being determined by a free market and the rule of law, the success of a business is dependent on the favoritism that is shown to it by the government in the form of tax breaks, government grants, and other incentives. In practice, this is the dominant form of capitalism worldwide due to the powerful incentives both faced by governments to extract resources by taxing, regulating, and fostering rent-seeking activity, and those faced by capitalist businesses to increase profits by obtaining subsidies, limiting competition, and erecting barriers to entry. In effect, these forces represent a kind of supply and demand for government intervention in the economy, which arises from the economic system itself. Crony capitalism is widely blamed for a range of social and economic woes. Both socialists and capitalists blame each other for the rise of crony capitalism. Socialists believe that crony capitalism is the inevitable result of pure capitalism. On the other hand, capitalists believe that crony capitalism arises from the need of socialist governments to control the economy. SPONSORED
My journey growing my passive income: Forex copy trading
Dear passive_income redditors, For years I searched ways to enable me to earn enough passive income to cover my daily expenses. I have tried literally everything online I could get my hands on, not all of them being 100% passive. Matched betting and value betting for example made me a couple of grand, but were about 10 minutes a day and were not scalable at all since I got limited very quickly. Crypto investing made me some good money, but also a lot of stress since it was the Wild west in comparison with traditional investing and days could turn out to double your investment or half your investment. Besides that I purchased a real estate property partly from my job earnings and partly from my crypto realized gains and am starting to rent it out (I know, we can debate whether real estate is passive, but that is not the intention of my post). Things that lost me money were dropshipping businesses, Facebook ads, and a lot of other silly stuff. But I found a hidden gem to make passive income easily. Earlier this year, around March I came across copytrading within the Forex market. I started in April 2019 with a deposit of $5,000. Today, June 12th, it's worth $5,800+. On average I got a 7-8% return in April and May on my deposit. While this is immense, it's more conservative to aim for a return of around 5% a month. The idea is as follows: you copy the trades a professional and profitable trader makes by automating the process using optimal software. You pay a monthly fee to cover for the traders' signals and connect a VPS to these two. I'm not a technical guy at all so I pay a legit business 25% of my net earnings to set it up for me and monitor it daily. They also fix your account when errors appear once in a while with the software. This way your accounts follows a masters' account managed by this professional trader and just copies his trades automatically. The traders you can choose from have historical track-records. The one I follow averaged about 6.7% compounded monthly since the start of his account in 2015. Resulting in a total gain of about 1850%-1900%. This is a 19x initial investment in 4 years. By using welcome deposit bonuses that different Forex brokers offer, you could double the gain or halve the risk (something I definitely do). This method is 100% passive and there is no chance of someone being able to access your money since the trader that provides the signals never has access to your account. Your funds are between you and the Forex broker you sign up with. So you are at control of your money 24/7 and able to close trades whenever you want as well (not optimal to do). Is it too good to be true? If you think this, I can't blame you. I always read these scams of Forex people on social media and I've experienced different ''too good to be true'' situations in my life. But remember, your capital can't never be accessed and these people have track records. In the 9-10 weeks I participated now, every week was profitable. Highest drawdown that occurred was about 6% (which is only virtual). So don't take it from me, but try it. Keep in mind that the only downside is with a 5% return and the monthly costs of 75EUR you have to have a capital of around $5,000 to start with to be able to make good returns and let it compound up. TLDR: copied someones trades in the Forex market using automatisation software. Paid 75EUR a month and made 16% in 9 weeks without doing anything.
https://preview.redd.it/97irkcrbmja41.png?width=494&format=png&auto=webp&s=5f2643957a258f58e304fb8eee42f4029066b38e Introduction Gold is an important normal assets providing for all humankind by method for God Himself, it draws potential investors much like a magnet does draws. Do you comprehend why ? Since anyplace Gold is-individuals go toward that course looking for financial harmony and future ability benefits that must be found in gold. At the point when we look at the stock marketplace thing; we can see eagerly that gold has kept up a strong charge during that time and has certain a ton of investors as a helpful shop of riches and money for individuals. By and large, most extreme purchasers buy the gold prospects to differentiate danger. In any case, gold has demonstrated itself to be solid predictable and a safe for all. Contrasting this concurrent with crypto forex is the reason the Digital Gold platform is here. Digital Gold platform is expecting to move the more normal qualities of gold into the cryptographic money worldwide along these lines making a solid, solid, secure, verified and predictable stable coin for the digital currency worldwide to appreciate and enjoy. In all nutshell; I will advise us nowadays the reason why the virtual gold platform stable coin is higher than the present Stable coins. Existent solid coins blessing nowadays are normally asset supported digital forms of money on the front; and even as a couple are unified to a definite vault; some Steady coins are decentralized. Unified stable coin are helpless against hack or likely overlap up; while Decentralized are supported either through fiat or digital currency or with the guide of sources that are more than precious including gold, silver, etc For what reason is Digital Gold Stable coins the quality? The digital gold solid coin; with ticker GOLD is a decentralized stable coin supported by method for the Gold precious metallic; which ensures that the expense of the gold steel is equivalent to the expense of the gold token; this ensures the gold token : The gold token worth is consistent constantly and moreover really redeemable anytime you need; it is additionally consistently sought after. The gold token is financed through 9200 bullion Gold vault which rises to 9200 gold tokens. I.E 9200 Gold in vault = 9200 gold tokens. **N.B: The Gold Platform Group gave 9200 tokens in light of the fact that legitimate now The Gold vault shops 9200 grams of gold. 1 gram of gold = 1 gold token. After investors purchase the limit of the existent 7200 tokens, the digital gold association will purchase a fresh out of the box new part of metal gold and put it inside the vault carport. From that point forward, the team will transfer GOLD tokens to more markets. With such highlights above; I can tell you that gold token stable coin is the way ahead in safeguarding our accounts secure; verified, straightforward and totally supported by methods for 7,200 gold vault. I really have had a non-open run over with the platform and it's the charming stablecoin I have happened upon. As upon the arrival of distributing this content, The gold token is buyable and sellable at the gold site, https://gold.storage. Moreover, you can change the gold token on Cryptex website. Visit https://cryptex.exchange Also you can trade Digital Gold to at https://www.bitforex.com/en/spot/gold_btc https://livecoin.net/en/trading/GOLD_BTC https://www.catex.io/trading/GOLD/BTC Do you wish to know more information, quickly visit: Website: https://gold.storage/ Whitepaper: https://gold.storage/wp.pdf Bitcointalk ANN: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5161544 Telegram: https://t.me/digitalgoldcoin Twitter : https://twitter.com/gold_erc20 Bitcointalk name: Raymzopai Bitcointalk Link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2129537;sa=summary
I'm doing a tribute to the 24 days of Christmas by going over the financial statements of 24 companies that are considered downrange, speculative, and just plain high risk. The legal cannabis industry already has a ton of risk in it - but this stuff - is only for thrill seekers. All opinions are my own, and certainly not a recommendation for or against any of them, or to buy or sell. I've limited myself to 45mins to each, and kept to most recent financial statements You'll likely know more about the company than me if you're following them. This is only my reactions with a brief commentary about what I see in their financial statements. I haven't been consistent in following them all over the past year: some I have, others not. The first one this year.....is here LDS - Lifestyle Delivery Systems Price Then: $0.34 - Price Now: $0.37
They call themselves a pharmaceutical company. Ok. Yet R&D as a percentage of expenses is less than 5% of total. Guessing they discovered what they were looking for.
SBC $1.8MM last quarter.
Revenues have been languishing until this quarter. $600k reported, double the first 6 months of their year.
Gotta say, related party transactions seem to be an emerging theme of this year’s crawl. Note 7.
At the burn rate they have (consulting fees per note 7), they’re gonna have to go back to the well pretty quick.
PP&E increased by $6MM, to $16MM.
Capital structure is a steaming pile (Note 8). Should have a warning statement in front of it before reading.
Speaking of which, immediate vesting of stock options for management is waaay cute.
And unlike most of the year, share price decay is going to be shutting down any fun that could’ve been had.
Almost all o/s warrants exercised. Only 5MM left now.
Bleh. Still looks like a very expensive front office for a million a year in revenue and 50% margin. Leverage is nose bleed inducing, $26MM in accumulated deficit, and no real end in sight. If I was a shareholder - I’d be all over mgmt. As in: ‘when will a business actually emerge here?’. Still looks like an ATM for mgmt. RTI - Radient Technologies Price Then: $1.54 - Price Now: $0.77
Buckets and buckets of cash. $47MM. 2 large raises, one each previous quarter.
Revenue flat yoy. $3.5MM in operating expenses last quarter. Expenses suggest operational build out occurring.
Given quarterly sales of $100k - that build out will need to do something. Sometime. Soon.
SBC is down from $4.2MM to $800k same period. Hmm.
Margin no hell.
Share printer on overdrive (glowing white hot really. Probably could be deployed as a cogen for heat recapture).
Long term debt is cheap.
Share capital in Note 10: an abominable snowman. Really. And since so many of these seem to land in the #10 slot, I’m going to avoid that number on all lotto tickets I buy from here on out.
Take out the bank balance, the market is valuing the business at about $0.50. For 2 years of stagnant revenue and billowing losses...$7MM last 2 quarters alone...meh. They do look to be operationalizing, perhaps that’s the dev cycle this industry business model is within. If that’s the case, I’m looking to see what happens over the next year - and if the spend justifies the returns. Investors should be hoping their sales pipeline doesn’t turn into a TransMountain. TNY - Tinley Beverage Company Price Then: $0.85 - Price Now: $0.46 Funny enough, Tinley came across the radar a few months ago, and the elves took a stab at it. A couple of fans of this outfit took umbrage with their characterization at the time. They still didn’t put up any math though. Nor referenced the financials. I was talking with u/GoBlueCdn the other day on the phone, and in conversation, he said: ‘fundamentals will always bear out.’ I couldn’t agree more. The noise and heat and smoke and knees and elbows of the intra-houday/week/month price moves….will always get throat-punched by solid ops. Never a question of it. It’s simply a function of time. The question of whether fanboys (and their accusations) will still be there when night turns to day….is an answerable one. They usually melt like toilet paper put into water. I stick to financials. If they're rocking it, I'll say so. If they're not......same deal. I haven’t looked at these guys since then. Let’s do it again…..
Cash issues on back burner, they have some now. Given they need it to operate, that’s a good thing.
Intangibles mercifully low (fresh as a spring rain in this crowd).
$30MM deficit in S/E. A pretty large bump under the corner of the rug.
Lost $1.1MM on $52k of sales. Been a year now. And they’ve had the margaritas out now for a quarter. Maybe haven't shown up yet.
Net $100k loss on forex. Sigh. Just like the good ol’ days of last year's Crawl.
Props to them for a SBC and G&A. If this thing looked like an actual business, I suspect it’d be higher.
Shares o/s metastatic. Shares that are issued are seemingly born pregnant.
Godammit. Another Note ’10’. This one is like staring at the sun. Where’d I put those welding glasses…..
CFO is cheap relative to others in c-suite. Bad negotiator, or, value for money? Your choice.
G&A inelegant. See for yourself….Note 15. Honest.
Ok. I could wax poetic for awhile on this, nothing other than incremental at this point really. I don’t have anything against it. I like the idea of drinkables, but I've never tried one. And….I’m woefully ignorant about emulsions and such. If it’s a good product: I’m there. Probably like most people. The reality is that these guys have tripped and slipped and reset several times…and aren’t delivering. Maybe I have expectations that are unreasonable (like the one’s they’ve established in the investor decks?). One way or the other, limping along with no sales will eventually catch up with you. Despite the pitch. Revenues fix almost everything. Onward: iAn - Ianthus Capital Holdings Scratched! Now post merger with MPX - and that I’ve already done that one - means redundancy at this juncture. We’ll skip this, and add a newcomer to the list at the end. Xmas surprise time! CHV - Canada House Wellness Group Inc Price Then: $0.37 - Price Now: $0.13
Lots of cash atm. That’s definitely gonna be needed as we’ll see. Sales Tax rec’ble says they’ve had sales too. They're gonna need every cent.
Liabilities remain as big of yoke as last time. An ox pulling a dull plough through compacted soil is the mental image I get.
$32MM in accumulated deficit in S/E. Plenty of ‘junk in the trunk’.
$1.2MM in revenue. $1.4MM in salaries.
That $1.4MM in salaries is only 38% of total operating expense.
Love the detail in financials. Remember it from last year. All companies can do this. And it’s appreciated.
Interest expenses are from another planet. A very, very big planet.
These guys need a tourniquet. Hemorrhaging from every limb, orifice, window, door, niche and crevice.
Seeing SBC of $1.4MM - in this operational state - C’mon. Seriously. There’s pushing envelopes, and then there’s that.
Added $1.1MM in ‘intellectual property’ - but it’s not itemized. WTF. Did I miss it? Curious if actually omitted. ?
Another Note 10 setting new benchmarks of vulgarity….I got light headed reading it.
This one could have a sign over it’s Note 10 portcullis: ’Abandon all Hope Ye Who Enter Here.’
Interest free loans to a director (when an outfit is in this shape????)
“You are now entering Liquidation City” Population: CHV Home of the ‘cash only’ auction. All purchases must be removed by 5PM or goods and purchase price will be forfeited From doing these guys last year, I recall vividly how much I appreciate good disclosure. With it, there’s not only many more items to divine the entrails of - it also allows one to get a 3D look at an outfit. Often, business dislikes this for obvious reasons (it signals activities/plans/competitive advantages), but also because many people are uncomfortable taking a shower in public. I took my foot off the throttle though after a certain point with these guys - there’s much more to speak to. All of it negative. I went a little overtime on this one, because I like the idea of a patient-centric Canadian producer. But. If these guys last a year….there’s going to have to be capital infusion, and Note 10 will probably expand to the size of a large city’s phone book. It’s looking as proof that c-suite changes don’t change underlying business realities. And these guys need major changes, in far more than management. LIB - Liberty Leaf Holdings Price Then: $0.48 - Price Now: $0.10
not much cash, all they had seems to have gone into ‘facility equipment’.
Since they don’t seem to have a facility (on their books anyhow) that makes sense.
Appears to have pivoted (the elves always chuckle hearing that word) from aspiring producer, to ‘cannabis business accelerator’.
I read this as that they took a couple of runs at getting a grow op up, but got high centred on the meridian of ACMPR licensing delays (Pivot Time!)
Note 8 & 9 cover their ‘investing activities’. But it’s mainly transactional. If they’re ‘building value’ for shareholders, odd way to do it using paper on non-operating assets, and no apparent uplift able to be predicted.
CEO has gotten some help - he’s gone from ‘Chief Cook & Bottle Washer’ to mainly big chair activities.
SBC of a million dwarfs all other income statement spends
60% of assets is their own paper, issued as ‘investment in associate’
$26MM of S/E? Please meet $26MM deficit in S/E. LIB’s capital is ostensibly only paper, and more paper.
If liquidated on hard assets, company would realize $2MM. I didn't have time to look into unconsolidated subs.
The loading of optionality in 2019? Pretty much all struck. Most of management's fruit has been shaken from the tree.
Whoop. Spoke too soon. Still 5MM of $0.17 options left to go. Looks like there’s still a lot of fruit up top yet
Note 19 is all one needs to read on this thing.
This feels like a squatter-aspiring-to-be-taken-out…..shifted to……business-accelerator-ATM-for-mgmt. The businesses they’ve invested in could use a lot of accelerating btw, they’ve picked ones that are like cars rusting in a field. The blockchain outfit has shed half its value since listing, and the late stage applicant’s business(es) appear to be suspended in amber. They’re also connected to some clinical trials, a retail facing outfit, among several others. All paper, all the time. If there’s a business in here outside of a cashlessly fuelled pitch deck (written on lots of paper), I can’t see it. Perhaps something will happen someday. Nothing has in the last 365 of them. Excepting SBC of course. It's been busy there. QCC - Quadron Cannatech Corp Price Then: $0.38 - Price Now: $0.12
Cash and inventory and liabilities and S/E relatively flat.
A/R shows sales throughput
30% margins. G&A lean. SBC exemplary for industry.
SBC might also be low because share price has tanked.
Sales needed. Slower industry ramp has slowed industry need for equipment. Should be stronger year if the underlying operational capacity begins to expand, and demand for units cranks.
Very clean financials. Not much else to say or see.
This one is dead simple in the financial statements. Love love love. Whether they’ll start extracting revenue, is solely a function of their sales channel. As I’ve learned over the past year - everybody (and I mean everybody) - is in the extraction space. Operating in this industry sub-sector is like being in a sardine can without any oil (pun intended). Crowded space indeed. Cashflow is the core of business, and, if QCC can compete and succeed within what is a very competitive landscape - all power to them (and Canadian manufacturing as well). Calling this a ‘challenging environment’ is an understatement. Sales need to begin growing. Another year in the same general state will test market patience, which, is looking like its' already becoming impatient. Disclaimer - I've met Rosy several times now, and have come to respect her very much. I believe she’s a class act: both professionally, and personally. FWIW, full disclosure. I’m gonna go have some egg nog with the elves and compliment them on their behavior. They don't start drinking until after 1PM most days now. That they get out of bed around noon, it's not really saying much. Still, a big improvement over last year.
Hi guys, Maybe a week ago I posted here asking for advice on how to move my house deposit to the USA from Australia. Most of the advice I received was to look into bitcoins. I posted there as well and based on more advice made there conducted my investigation and figured I would share my case study with you guys so people also running into this problem might have somewhere to start. DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES TAKE THIS AS FINANCIAL ADVICE. The numbers I quote here are wrong from pretty much the moment I post this, and obviously my bank is not every bank, etc... So, the three options I investigated were bitcoins, a forex website and my bank. For the case studies purpose I will be looking to move a hypothetical 50k AUD to USD, at the moment google quotes the exchange rate as 1AUD=0.89USD. In my circumstance, I wanted to move the money in only one transaction, moving in it multiple chunks was a deal breaker. Option 1. Bank: The simple choice given at first I was worried about the money getting frozen on the way if one or either banks got upset at such a large amount of money moving. Discussion with the bank on the american side revealed they pretty much don't give a shit. I would need to talk to the bank on the aussie side to move such a large amount in one go (my account was set at maximum transaction limit of $5000 a day). The maths: My bank would do an international telegraphic transfer for $20 online, seems quite good until you look at their conversion rate (at the time of writing 0.8523) 50000-20=49980 -> 42622.94USD Option 2: Forex. I signed up with a forex website that looked like it offered good rates. After registering online I received a phone call in about 20min to confirm my identity and check some details. Process involves me arranging a deal online, shifting my money to their bank account in Australia and they do the exchange and send it overseas for me to my nominated bank account. Again I would need to speak to my bank to arrange such a large transfer due to my limits but that portion shouldn't be any trouble. Great for me, transactions above 10kAUD had no transaction fees ($15AUD otherwise), only the price that they sell the USD to you and that price gets better the more money you transfer. Basically, their only fee is the money you lose by not getting the USD's true price. And their prices were very good after playing with the calculators a bit. Putting in 50kAUD now nets me a lovely buy price of 0.8852USD. Lowering that amount lowers the buy price, raising it raises the buy price. Even so, low buy prices were better than the banks. 50000-15=49985 -> 44246.72USD Option 3. Bitcoin. As someone who has never used bitcoins before, and never really even looked into it other than understanding what mining is, this is obviously an option that requires a lot of research and setting up on my part. That said, as far as I understood the process it would initially require me to buy 50kAUD worth of bitcoins, transfer to a US wallet for a small fee then sell again. Hence there will likely be loss AUD - Bitcoin transaction (not getting 50k worth of bitcoin for true AUD value) the transfer fee and likely a loss on the US side (not selling all the bitcoin for their true value in USD) just like exchanging money. I looked at the australia bitcoin website bitXoin - fee 3.7% plus the buying price of bitcoins. My 50K has shrunk to a 483500AUD just from that fee - not looking good. BitCoinTrader next - 5% fee for conversion of AUD to bitcoin. LocalBitcoins violates my rule of doing it in only one transaction so I discarded that option as you have to buy 50kAUD worth of bitcoins off several people most likely. Going back to BitXoin what would happen if I followed through? At this moment they have 1BTC valued as 1179.96AUD so my 50k (-3.7%) buys me 40.9759652BTC (I have no idea how many decimal places BTC goes to but that should give us a rough idea of the final amounts). Let assume a fee of 0.001BTC (which works out to be about 1AUD) to transfer, I now have 40.9749652BTC in my US wallet. Next step, sell for USD. Coinbase at this moment have a sell price of 896.67USD which seemed really low! This would mean my BTC would net me 36741USD!!?? BC changer offers 1017.59USD which still only gets me 41695USD!! Basically, with bitcoin, you will get attacked by buy and sell prices on both ends of the transaction, rather than just one. Next to fluctuations if the price changes which could go well or go badly, your risk. Bitcoin is most definitely not an option in this case study to move money. It may be an option if you already have bitcoins though, because then you only get scrapped on the sell price. In this situation, even the bank out performed Bitcoins. In real life, I made the choice to go with forex. TL;DR - Bitcoins are not a viable option in this case study for transferring money from AUD to USD. If you already have bitcoins might be worthwhile but was not considered. Do the maths on it yourself.
A financial expert's very negative outlook on Bitcoin.
Hello there people of reddit! I have translated this blog post which I would like to share with you all. The original blog post appeared in a rather famous hungarian financial blog and it posed some interesting questions. It would be really good if the intelligent people of reddit would start a debate on these topics. There is a big learning opportunity here. I personally disagree with many of the points made in the post while I agree with some of them. I think that it is important to listen to the negative opinions because we can grow from them and we can either strengthen our opinions by disproving the counter-arguments of others or we can formulate and fine-tune our opinions by accepting partial truths from the opposing opinion. (Maybe we can even change our opinions alltogether in some cases) I post this in the hopes of having an intelligent conversation about the topic and it would be a bit sad if this would get downvoted because then the conversation wouldn’t be able to unfold. I say let's examine the other side, let's look at their arguments, let's try to understand them and let’s try to learn from them so that we may become smarter, better, and more well informed. Also this can be a very good test if you think about investing in Bitcoin. If this discourages you then your fundamental knowledge of cryptocurrencies or Bitcoin may not be satisfactory yet or you may be thinking about investing with money what you cannot afford to loose So without further to do here is the actual blog post translated from kiszamolo.hu. RTT314 I am writing about Bitcoin. I didn’t want to at all but since everybody is talking about it I had to. Translator's note: There was a previous blog post about Bitcoin which got a massive amount of feedback in the hungarian community. The general feedback I received about my previous post on Bitcoin wonderfully resembled the the feedback I got when I wrote about Kairos, Emgoldex, Quaestor and Sitetalk. (these were all scams in their times) In case you don’t have time to read the comments on my previous post I’ll summarize them for you. Its quite simple because people basically write the same thing all over again (Bitcoin or Emgoldex it doesn’t matter.) The comment categories are as follows:
You have no idea about the topic.
You’re an arrogant jealous prick, who wants to screw up people’s chance of getting rich.
You have my respect all the time, but with this opportunity you missed the point big time.
This is different, this is a new technology, this will work for sure. This is a huge innovation, this is something people never heard before, this technology is on the verge of exploding into the mass-media. (Oh how many times have I heard this when it came to similar topics)
It’s a good idea to look at those people who wrote these comments a few years back. The people of Kairos who came here (to his blog) taunting and showing off their earnings with Kairos. And then all of a sudden it became apparent that it was just another scam and they lost all the money in a heartbeat. What did I cover in the previous blog post on Bitcoin? I wrote, that you don’t know anything about Bitcoin, that you don’t know who is behind it or whether there is someone behind it or not. What gives actually Bitcoin’s value? How do we know that its better than the other cryptocurrencies? How do we know if one BTC is expensive for 1000 dollars or cheap? For a long time people bought it for 1 dollar, then for a long time for 100, then 1000 and now 16 thousand. Which price is the realistic one? Or none of it is realistic and its still cheap? How can I find it out? I have basically nothing at all to which I could compare its price. Just like in the dotcom bubble when it came to evaluating the .com companies. The normal method of evaluation didn’t work when it came to these companies because everybody wanted to think, that these companies can conquer the whole world. And because of that basically no price was too expensive for a share. And then it became apparent, that in fact even a single dollar was too much for 95% of them. Just because something is revolutionary and new it doesn’t mean that it has value too. Especially when anybody can copy it freely. This happened with the .com companies too. Everybody learned fast, that just because they are innovative and revolutionary they can’t make a profit and most of them didn’t even worth a penny. And the .com companies were 100 times easier to evaluate than Bitcoin. At least they had expenses, profits, employees, products and patents. You could at least calculate with something. Why is Bitcoin considered money? Currently it has none of the properties of money - you can’t pay with it everywhere, it’s exchange rate is not stable at all and because of that it is not suitable for accumulating wealth in it (just in the past 12 hours the price of one BTC was between $16.123 and $17.023 and today is one of the calmer days.) Anybody can invent a newer Bitcoin and people do so too. There’s almost ten times more cryptocurrencies today than normal currencies in the world and almost every day a new one gets listed. This is because anybody can make a cryptocurrency. You don’t have to have a whole country behind it with its total assets, government, and financial traffic. If you have good marketing you will be a millionaire from a new cryptocurrency. Currently there are 1324 cryptocurrencies and there is almost no day when no new ones are added. On the contrary there is only 180 types of traditional currencies in the world. I also mentioned, that governments can limit the use of cryptocurrencies any time by illegalizing the exchange of cryptocurrencies to real money. And if that happens all cryptocurrencies will be worthless in a blink of an eye. I don’t want to get into new ideological debates. I just want to place Bitcoin amongst all the hype into the world’s financial traffic. Where does Bitcoin stand compared to the current world’s financial traffic and does it look like a bubble? Will it really change the world’s financial system and will it really change the old technologies? Bitcoin’s total market cap was 15,49 billion dollars on 2017 January the 1st and what’s at least as important is that the daily traffic volume was 92 million dollars. https://imgur.com/a/kI0Ru Bitcoin’s current market cap (17 thousand dollars) is 289 billion dollars and the daily traffic volume is 12.135 million dollars so the daily traffic grew 131-fold since January the 1st. One of the world’s biggest bank - the Bank of America’s - market cap is also 300 billion dollars and that is accompanied by 2,228 billion dollars worth of assets which gives one of the basis of the actual evaluation. Bitcoin has zero assets. Bank of America every four months (!!!) profits 22,3 billion dollars and one fifth of this is net profit. The profit of Bitcoin is zero and the net profit of Bitcoin is also zero. Europe’s 16th biggest economy, Finland has a yearly GDP of 236 billion dollars. If Bitcoin’s market cap doubles again, it’s market cap will be equal to Hungary’s, Ukraine’s, Slovakia’s, Luxemburg’s, Croatia’s, Bulgaria’s and Latvia’s GDP all together. Or at least on paper. (Of course the actual BTC's market cap and the GDP is very different, but i guess you can still feel the nonsense in this) People make 337 thousand daily transactions with Bitcoin. Just Visa alone makes 468 million transactions per day and this is just a tiny slice from the total world’s transactions. The SWIFT system which is used by banks to make international transfers even 12 years ago made 5 thousand billion dollars worth of traffic. Daily.(!) The similiar Fedwire payment system which works in the USA had a daily traffic of 2,1 thousand billion dollars, the CHIPS had 1,4 thousand billion dollars. And these numbers are 12 years old so you can easily double them to get to the present numbers. And this data is only of three clearing houses out of a dozen! All the national clearing houses in total can have multiple hundred times more traffic than these ones. Even if we would like to use Bitcoin for just one tenth of the traffic of Visa we would soon have to store a few gigabytes then terabytes of data for each Bitcoin. The whole electricity generation and bandwidth of the world wouldn’t be enough if we would want to manage and transmit this much data constantly. (Even now the Bitcoin network uses more power than Bulgaria. The investors who mine Bitcoin spend money mostly on video cards and electricity. The biggest benefitors of Bitcoin are the chinese electricity providers and the video card companies. Even a whole bank system doesn’t use this much electricity and they execute multiple hundred thousand times more transactions than the Bitcoin’s network.) The technology is unsuitable for microtransactions. There are cryptocurrencies which are suitable for this but what will happen with you investment in Bitcoin when everybody starts to use one of these currencies? The future of the blockchain technology is completely different from the future price of Bitcoin which currently is just one out of 1324 cryptocurrencies and for which you paid a bunch of money. Somehow the people who kick back and leave their future on the price of Bitcoin don’t want to understand this. Just so you understand: I don’t argue whether or not blockchain technology (which is used by Bitcoin too) will be used in the future financial system. I argue whether or not one Bitcoin values 17 thousand dollars or even one dollar as a matter of fact. Do you think there will be a single bank which will choose exactly Bitcoin when it wants to switch to this new technology when Bitcoin is a completely unsuitable candidate? Or do you think that the bank will choose another cryptocurrency? Won’t the bank simply make its own one? The total value of all the dollar bills in circulation is 1,59 trillion dollars or 1590 billion dollars. If we look at the M3 (unbounded money in bank accounts, bills etc.) instead of only the bills we get 11 trillion dollars. But even this is only a tiny bit compared to the total assets in the american economy which is 220 trillion dollars. The daily size of the forex market is (!) 5.100.000.000.000 dollars. So think again when you see numbers which suggest that Bitcoin is the future. I wrote these numbers just so you can get a sense of the big Bitcoin which is about to knock down the world’s banking system. Just so you can understand the big Bitcoin’s place in the financial food chain. I’d also like to talk about a common misconception. Many people think that the value of Bitcoin comes from the fact that it’s very expensive to maintain. The mining is expensive. This is called an expense and it has no relation to value whatsoever. Things don’t represent value because they are costly to maintain. This is exactly the opposite of value. The more expensive is something to maintain the less valuable it is. Companies which have small costs value more than companies which have big costs with the same profits. There’s an old trick in the stocks market called pooling. A few scammers organize into a pool, they choose a smaller stock and they start to trade amongst each other with higher and higher prices. They just have to be careful not to catch attention. They have to increase the price gradually and slowly and the pool has to be big enough in order to stay undetected. When the whole world goes crazy because of the huge gains on the pooled stock and when everybody wants to be a part of the miracle the pool quietly sell the whole stack of stocks and disappear. The “investors” which are driven by greed don’t even care about the fact that the evaluation of the stock flied far above the actual value of the stock. How much simpler is this whole move when the given thing doesn’t even have a quantifiable value to which you can compare it to? Bitcoin is exactly like this. I wonder how are Bitcoins divided amongst the wallets? Could you drive up its value by getting into pools? You can’t drive up its value because it doesn’t even have any inherent value. The value of Bitcoin only comes from the people who are willing to pay for it. Bitcoin only has a price because people want to look at it as money even if it cannot function as money. The american dollar will have value until the United States exists and its government collects taxes in dollars from the world’s biggest economy and it pays its payouts in dollars. And if someone doesn’t want to pay the requested taxes in dollars the government has the power to imprison the person. The expression of total financial ignorance is when the believers of Bitcoin state that the real currencies are also based on nothing. The real currencies are just paper too without any value. Every real currency is backed by real value: the given country’s economy, assets, government, tax system give real value to the real currency. No cryptocurrency can present anything like this ever because cryptocurrencies are made out of thin air. Real currencies can function exactly because of this: because they have value too not just a price. This is why they can be a store of value, this is why they can be accepted in trade. Because tomorrow they will be worth just as much as today. They’re not just empty ping pong balls which are moved based on the needs and wants of the buyer. Potentially 10-20% per day. (Just for the sake of the smartpants: of course after world wars a real currency can lose value too just like how the syrian fiat lost value too when the value was essentially bombed out of it. The country’s economy collapsed and half of the taxpayers died or fled out of the country. But even this shows exactly the fact, that the price of the currency changes if the inherent value changes. And also the the price of the safety fiats (swiss franc) can be pumped up if investors are panicking. But we only know that their price is high compared to what their value is because it has a value.) Just because I invent the Reddit coin and create a lot but finite real physical coins it won’t be a currency which has value. Not even if the coins are unfalsifiable. Not even if there will be people who are willing to pay real money for my coins. Not even if other people realize that they can make coins just like me any time (that’s why there are already 1324 types of cryptocurrencies on the market) It won’t be real money even if following the current trend I create this Reddit coin as a cryptocurrency. Money doesn’t become money because I say its money. Neither does it become money because other people believe its money. But let's take a look at the bitcoin wallets amongst the investors: https://imgur.com/a/WN163 So basically 97,2% of the wallets doesn’t even own a single bitcoin! And 55,5% of the wallets doesn’t even contain 0,001 bitcoin! Of course a wallet is not necessarily a person but its apparent that there are many small fish in the sea of Bitcoin. It's good to know this when you read all the comments from the people who try to defend Bitcoin no matter what. Most of them don’t even own 700 bucks worth of bitcoin but they will become rich for life from this investment. 0,01% of the investors - 1.677 people own nearly 40% of the total bitcoins available. (Or it may be that these 1.677 wallets are owned by one person or twenty. We can’t even know that) but even 85% of the total bitcoins is in less than 1% of the wallets. In stocks lingo this is called a low free float. These people are the ones who manipulate the prices however they want it to. But of course they don’t want it to because why would they want such a thing? The prices are rising just because Bitcoin is the future. If Bitcoin wouldn’t be the Holy Bitcoin it would be simply called a Ponzi scheme. How does a Ponzi scheme look exactly? They build up a system which is new, which is alluring and about which people can believe that it’s the future. From this you’ll become rich. If you pay enough money now then you’ll be the part of the money rain too. Until more people are buying in than out the Ponzi scheme works great. Nobody realizes that there’s nothing behind it. Just the money of the depositors gives it value. Bitcoin is genial because it never even stated that there is some sort of value behind it so you can’t even expect it in the first place. Until more people want to put money in than out the price of Bitcoin will rise. I’ll say this again Bitcoin is alive because people want to treat it as money. “This is the money of the future, you are lagging behind if you don’t understand this. Why do you try to find the inherent value of it and the evaluation of it? You are an old prick who has no clue. This is a new world. Deal with it. You have to just believe this and don’t ask any questions.” Do you know how many times have I heard this from the faithful “investors” of the kairos, sidetalk, emgoldex ponzi schemes? A lot of people wait a lot from the december 18th stock appearance of Bitcoin but it can bring more bad than good. If the big speculators start to go hard on it they can double the price or drag it down to 0 within days. It's rather easy for them because there is no value behind it. Just a price tag. If the British Pound was attacked what do you think what will they do with Bitcoin? Here there is no national bank which will change the interest rates or pull other tricks from its sleeves to defend its own currency from falling or from a rising. Also here the investors won’t be able to say that a bitcoin is definitely worth more than this or not because the whole english economy is not behind it so they don’t have a guide for its inherent value. If Bitcoin was volatile so far you can prepare yourself for even bigger storms. You think whatever you want and you pay money for whatever you want. You know what? Even I’m telling you that knowing the madness, dumbness, and greed of people it is not unimaginable that Bitcoin will rise to 150 thousand dollars within the next year. But not because its value is that much but because there are too many greedy people who feel like they were left out of a great opportunity but it's not too late to jump in. But also don’t be amazed if its price will be 1 dollar again.
Crisis Killer Review | Thinking Of Buying ? Don’t !
A trading robot that can make you honestly Big Time profits without worrying that you play on the chances of winning! Come on, guys – If only it were that simple … .. We do not know about you, but we pretty tired of seeing robots, training programs and made every week by some of the largest operators in the game plans. And when we came across the Crisis Killer then we must admit that we started automatically to contract with a cynicism … Crisis Killer Review : Is This Forex robot really good? However, this bot is written by a guy who made some serious money trading the markets, not to mention the fact that the Crisis Killer is the program that got Europe in turmoil right now. So we realized that we definitely need to get down and dirty with the program before we made any decisions about whether the program is a saint or a sinner. Read on to discover exactly what we discovered …
What you get for your money? Thus, as we have already stated, the Crisis Killer is a trading robot which, according to Thomas, its creator, is virtually guaranteed to double your money. And it works as follows: • It works on real money: with a deposit from 100,000 euros (you do not need to have that amount to trade, so do not panic …). The guy has invested this amount of his own money to show his confidence in the work of the system. And in two months, it shows definitive proof to double that 200 – pretty impressive the way you look at it. • A never done before – high reward low risk methodology: this is provided by the ability of the robot to recognize when a business begins to falter in less than 5 milliseconds. He opened new positions in order to absorb the bad trade with those positive trend. • The high trading activity: having between 10 and 30 jobs open at any given time, the bot can accurately measure the risks and rewards. We can therefore combine the value of transactions, cross-checking and refining them in the optimum position to close them all in a split second … and win big! • Failure of 3-layer proof safety net: The bot uses the taxes myfxchoice through three security reasons. 1) they have a minimum latency between the control and order execution (under 5 milliseconds), 2) they have one of the best reputations around customer satisfaction and c) they give priority support refine the bot if necessary. [Wplapdance name = "CrisisKiller"] • Small compliant repository: you can trade with as little as $ 100 game system still works the same (and, in fact, with small amounts system actually has a slightly higher winning percentage rate) .- the automatic installation: easy to install and use, with a few clicks of your mouse. What Is Crisis Killer Software ? A major drawback of many robots and trading systems is that you must have the knowledge to start. But with the Crisis Killer even a novice can literally plug it in, set up and start making money. Male or female, young or old, rich or poor, this is a program that has no boundaries and will work for everyone. But do not make the mistake of thinking that this is only for those who know nothing of the negotiations, because nothing could be further from the truth. Implement this little baby, give her a chance to show you what it's like to do and you money before you know it.
Which is Created By The Program? Just go by the name "Thomas", the creator of the Crisis Killer is a carrier IQ of 167 and the ability to calculate complex literally at the speed of light numerical equations. And he used that gift since his teens, and boy did companies billions of dollars sit up and take note. Red Bull, Magna and voestalpine are some of the conglomerates that have put their trust in Thomas, and his years of work enabled him to create a model of a formula that makes money trading the markets – again and again and again … Pros - Crisis Killer Review : • Killer crisis is simple to understand, install and start using. In fact, it is so simple that your five year old son or daughter could probably manage crisis … crissis killer killer review Is This Forex robot really good? • There is no initial purchase cost of the crisis Killer. You literally get a business license at no cost, and is the creator makes his money by the real estate commission on your winning trades. This means that there is no money taken from your income – period! • Because the benefits for its creator come from brokerage service (not your pocket), then this guy NEEDS crisis killer working for you. Because the more successful you are, the more money wins – a win-win situation all around. • The program comes with a 100%, 60 day money back guarantee on the activation fee (the tiny fee you pay to run your business set up. This is the only amount you pay for what either, and even that is covered for two incredible month! Cons - Crisis Killer Review : • So the biggest "con" is that it's a limited supply, and when the total take of the crisis killer has been reached then it will be withdrawn. No warning, no last chances, no countdown 24 hours – it'll just be there. So if you want then you need to take the plunge and go for it, because tomorrow it might not be there. The Bottom Line Well, well, well … We certainly did not expect to get to this point and did as crisis killer. Because, trust us, we had serious doubts about this program before we tried. But we definitely need to eat a huge dose of humble pie, because this little baby actually does what it says on the box (and it is a very rare thing when it comes to trading robots, believe us …). Of course, it can not remove 100% of the risk – no program can (and when we find that there is by writing reviews penthouse in Monte Carlo), but as long as you never risk more than you can afford to lose, then we think you will be very happy with the results that the crisis brings killer. Because it certainly gets the thumbs up from us, that's for sure …
If you have $500-$1000 to jump in with, I'd suggest buying some site so that you throw yourself into the deep end. Start looking through sites at Flippa.com. Since they are established websites for sale, they will be disclosing EVERYTHING. Earnings, traffic, how they get the traffic, etc. These are great examples to get you in the mindset of a web entrepreneur.
Not true at all. I actually sold off my inventory of 40+ sites because I'm literally too busy with other projects. The people who bought my websites are now enjoying the cash-flow that I used to have.
Also, there's pretty much no such thing as a "Set/Forget" website that makes you money. Everything needs some level of maintenance, and every site has the potential to stop making money overnight if google changes it's logarithm.
No, I actually studied Construction Management in college. - Best paying is like forex, mortgages, foreclosures, mesothilioma (sp?) etc. Worst are education, kids stuff, etc. But it doesn't matter what the niche is, you can still make money in any. And the higher-paying niches have MUCH more competition. - I get over a million visits a month. - SEO, Social Media, no PPC. The sites I buy, I do no marketing since they are already getting traffic. - My main site has been around 6 years. I probably put 10-30 hours a week into it. - Not interested in partnerships. I've got a few employees but don't need anymore.
Forums are better to get more user generated content. It's usually lower quality, but you get it for free. Forums are also typically harder to monetize because forum browsers know not to click on the adsense units.
Blogs can be tough because you have to do ALL the writing, however you can have higher quality content and probably more clicks since blog readers aren't quite as internet savvy as the interactive forum users.
I prefer Wordpress for sites where I'm writing the content. - You can use any host. If you aren't a high traffic site, then anything will do. - It really depends how you spend your time. - Forums are easy to set up, and once you have a userbase established, they typically grow over time. You don't have to do all the content for forums as well.
I don't read any books. Too short of an attention span. When you contact potential affiliates, make sure that you are offering them value and have a customized email. I get emails for affiliate programs all the time and just ignore them because they are either recycled letters or don't fit my site at all.
Definitely, especially if you can do it better than the other sites. There are 10 google positions on the first page, so even if you have competition, you can still nudge your way in. Also, there are billions of search terms that people use to find different stuff...
If you bought a quality site for $3000, you could probably be looking at a starting cash flow of ~$100 a month. You could probably increase it, but there are too many variables so it really depends on what you buy.
The buy limit order is placed below the current price of the EUR/USD forex pair. The current price is 1.08936. The buy limit is at 1.0775 (dotted lower line). Therefore, the price must drop to 1.0775 (or below) to fill the buy order. Buy limits are also used as targets, to get you out of a profitable short trade. *Fill means your order is completed, for example, if you put out an order to buy ... Definition of: Overnight Limit in Forex Trading The maximum amount of a position that can be held overnight. This is set by the central bank to limit exposure of positions that can not be closed during the night. Forex Trading - Net Position: The total value of all open positions combined. forex trading (Forex).The net position of the spot and forward positions in the same currency. Thus a bank could be long at spot but short the forward maturities, the net result ... Forex trading involves risk. Losses can exceed deposits. Losses can exceed deposits. We recommend that you seek independent advice and ensure you fully understand the risks involved before trading. A daily trading limit is the maximum amount, up or down, that a exchange traded security is allowed to fluctuate in one trading session. Forex (FX) is the market where currencies are traded and the term is the shortened form of foreign exchange. Forex is the largest financial marketplace in the world. With no central location, it ... The basic definition of the word broker is ... Most forex brokers have a deposit limit. The specific limit depends on your choice of currency, but usually it isn’t very high. 6. Are forex brokers safe? Licenced forex brokers comply with all financial standards and security measures that are employed by the world’s leading financial institutions. Encryption technology is used to ensure that ... Although credit associates make a difference between ‘line of credit and ‘credit limit’ and there are some legal ramifications for both but for the purpose of the following article we will leave the difference alone and treat them the same. Like most elements in credit management, setting ‘credit limits’ is an art and not a science of granting credit. There are seasoned credit profes Forex trading involves significant risk of loss and is not suitable for all investors. Full Disclosure. Spot Gold and Silver contracts are not subject to regulation under the U.S. Commodity Exchange Act. *Increasing leverage increases risk. GAIN Capital Group LLC (dba FOREX.com) 135 US Hwy 202/206 Bedminster NJ 07921, USA. GAIN Capital Group ...
Weekly Update on current long term trade positions and management, tips on how to trades with 0 indicators, and the honest truth about most forex that most TA traders and scalpers hate to hear ... Wear it Wednesday is something we do in Paparazzi. You take a picture and post what piece you're wearing. This is where I will showcase the piece I'm wearing. This Survey of Accounting video provides definitions and examples of operating, investing, and financing activities and wording for the Cash Flows Statement. How to convert currency in Oanda. If you're looking to adjust your cost base - enter/exit on limits to collect your rebate. For instance, let’s suppose you place an order to sell 10,000 of BAC at $22.50, and the bid price is ... For Multiple Integrals Playlist Engineering Mathematics : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwqCsahO7nSIlpMCarzYErxLwcGyM3U7S&playnext=1&index=1 For TU ... The ONLY Forex Trading Video You Will EVER NeedTHIS QUICK TEST WILL HELP YOU BECOME FINANCIALLY FREETake it HERE: https://discover.tiersoffreedom.comTo join my ... They’re not necessarily wealthy (or ‘high-net-worth’ as we say nowadays). Head teachers, doctors, senior executives are all in danger of exceeding the reduced lifetime allowance. Even their ... In this episode of LeadingAgile’s SoundNotes, Derek Huether and Dave Prior take on the topic of Leading and Lagging Indicators. During the podcast they discu... How Bankers Create Fiat Money & Fortunes for Themselves Cycle 1 • In the past, the Bankers owned a gold vault that people would deposit their gold bullion in...