I recall last summer asking about it with LMAX tech support chat, and they said no as well. It is unfortunate as LMAX has some good trading instruments. No hedging tho.
I’ve worked with LMAX before, and you’re dealing with a “real-ish” exchange in which your
Best Bid gets “one upped” by others; as everyone pretends to be a “market maker” and
can to some extent, get more “wholesale” pricing; but not without serious algorithmic
assistance and custom software.
The only unique value of LMAX is the ability to execute “some percentage” of your orders at
a “better than retail price” through being a “mini Market Maker”. Unless you can do that,
then the unique value of LMAX is lost. And even then, the larger Market Makers will never
take a bad trade and “hit” your Best Bid or Offer; but the smaller participants will occasionally
"take" your Bid or Offer and thus give you a “better than retail” price.
Other than that, LMAX has no particularly distinguishing features.
And the concept of “intra instrument hedging” is a “fiction” anyway… But that’s not
a discussion for this forum thread.
hyperscalper
Yeah, good point.
Thanks for the vid HS - really helpful. We (including me) need to start documenting more of that kind of primary source.
edit: interesting to see FinPro’s spread telegraph that sharp move before TradersWay ~ 2:45
I agree with RJ.
And the Ouagadougou time-zone is my favorite. I always keep my watch set to Ouagadougou time.
.
On another THREAD, Clemmo addressed a question to the [B]FX Choice[/B] representative regarding the removal of certain trading instruments from the broker’s menu of instruments.
An FX Choice rep referred to the “Company News” section of their website for details.
Here is the FX CHOICE ANNOUNCEMENT, dated 11/11/2016.
.
Hi Clint,
I think they communicated it on time and a fair way. I like if a broker tells the real reason. After all they live from profits as well and if nobody traded those instruments then no reason to keep them available.
I guess many would have not even said a reason, just to “close your positions”.
Still, if someone traded those pairs, this might be of little help to know why he cannot trade his pairs anyomre.
FE
Thanks a lot for sharing, really nice video.
Why is LMFX no longer checked as a trusted Broker?
LMFX has never been designated as a Trusted Broker.
Shortly after joining the Babypips forum (and this thread), [I]LMFX requested[/I] the Trusted Broker designation. See THIS POST and THIS POST for the back-story.
We debated their request, and decided that – before we could make a decision on their request – we needed some time to gather [I]data on live trading experience with LMFX.[/I]
Several times since then, I have asked (in this thread) whether there is interest in adding the Trusted Broker designation to LMFX – or to any other broker on our List. My most recent request was THIS POST. But, not much interest has been expressed.
At any time, if the participants in this thread want it, another broker (or more than one) can be awarded the Trusted Broker designation. That decision, like past decisions, basically will be a democratic vote taken here in this thread. See THIS POST for some background on the process.
The suggestion to designate LMFX as a Trusted Broker is still on the table.
.
CFTC is taking interest in crypto-currency.
China has already been at work on Ethereum. I am glad my country takes interest. Let’s hope the CFTC adds value instead of locking out anyone that isn’t a billionaire like they did to international Forex. My hopes are high and unfortunately confidence is low.
CFTC 2.0: US Regulator Unveils Plan to Step Up Blockchain R&D - CoinDesk
Cryptocurrencies, and bitcoin in particular, are starting to look like viable alternatives to the conventional money-transfer methods (bank wire, credit card, PayPal, etc.) that we have relied on for moving funds to and from our offshore brokers. The CFTC and other fascist regulators have attacked those conventional money-transfer methods, as a way of attacking the offshore brokers they serve.
My suspicion now is that the CFTC’s interest in “blockchain” technology is not at all about the purposes mentioned in the article. Instead, I suspect that the CFTC’s interest in “blockchain” is all about finding ways to [I]get control of cryptocurrency money-transfers,[/I] so that they can continue to strangle the offshore brokers who, so far, have escaped the iron fist of the CFTC.
In this circumstance, my hopes – as well as my confidence – are low.
.
Thats exactly what I have been advocating 
I think one of the biggest challenge for an average user is to get used to it. I tried to put a comprehensive post about bitcoins and all the relevant links that can be useful for an average user to get his forex account funded and converting his Dollars in BitCoins and vice versa, but unfortunately, my post didnt get published (perhaps because I’m still a “newbie” on this forum and not allowed to post long posts with bunch of links in it)
But it will be helpful if an older member takes a stab at educating users of this thread on how to use bitcoins and relevant providers, brokers & BTC exchanges.
BitCoin is one of the best source of money transfer available today and its mature enough of a technology to rely upon. It not only lets you fund your forex accounts, but also lets you plan your taxes efficiently (since bitcoins are either digital assets or a commodity and you can not be taxed unless its converted to fiat currency).
I think its totally worth it to get used to it.
@Clint , would you like to share your knowledge on bitcoins with your readers so everyone can benifit from it
Clint, I share your healthy scepticism about the interest in BTC (BitCoin).
Of course, we know the U.S. IRS classifies it as “property”, rather than “currency”
but we use it as currency. Property transactions are subject to capital gains, of course.
I’ve been working fairly extensively with Evolve.Markets MT4 since I like the
pricing, the MT4 platform uses GMT as its server time, and it has proven highly
reliable. I’m refining a scalping “nibbler” BOT scanning across the 28 Currency Pairs,
and have been testing on my Evolve.Markets variable spread BitCoin funded
account with 500:1 leverage (they fund with BTC only, I think).
It’s hard to get used to BIT (which is 0.000001 BTC) which is used on Evolve’s
MT4 platform. So while 50,000 BIT seems like a lot, it is 0.050000 BTC and
right now with the BTC frenzy rally against the USD 1 BTC is worth roughly $2200.
So that 50,000 BIT is about $110.00 at current peak exchange rates.
When I bought a small amount of BTC from CoinBase to fund the account, it was
about $1500 / BTC. BitCoin volatility against the USD is definitely another factor
in using this crypto currency; but that can also be an opportunity ?
Although I do not trade the Currency Pair BTCUSD, it is offered on the Evolve.Markets
MT4 platform. For me, I just trade the 28 Forex majors; with brokerage funding in BTC
instead of USD which would be the usual situation. I haven’t pulled any BTC out
into USD yet, so I can’t comment on that transaction. I’m just going to build the BTC
equity.
hyperscalper
WhyWeScalp,
The post you describe above sounds like a marvelous resource for traders interested in learning about and using bitcoin. [B]I want to encourage you to reconstruct that post, together with all the links you previously gathered, and take another shot at posting it here.[/B]
Before you attempt to post this information for the second time, save a copy, in case things go awry again. If that happens, send the entire post to me via Private Message, and I will post it in your name.
You are giving me more credit for bitcoin knowledge than I deserve. I am not a bitcoin expert.
I categorically deny that I am Satoshi Nakamoto.
.
.
HyperScalper,
Thanks for that post.
As we become more familiar with bitcoin – and as the price of BTC/USD (one bitcoin priced in dollars) goes ever higher – we’ll get more comfortable with the fractional divisions of bitcoin.
In theory, those fractional divisions of bitcoin are no more complicated than the fractional divisions of the dollar: quarters, dimes, nickels and pennies. But, the numbers themselves are a bit daunting.
Here are the fractional divisions converted to USD, [B]using a recent bitcoin price of BTC/USD = 2000:[/B]
[B]Unit[/B]
[B]Symbol[/B]
[B]Common Name[/B]
[B]Bitcoin Fraction[/B]
[B]USD Value[/B]
Bitcoin
BTC, XBT[B]*[/B]
bitcoin
1.0 BTC
$2,000
milli-Bitcoin
mBTC
milli-bitcoin
0.001 BTC
$2.00
micro-Bitcoin
µBTC
bit
0.000001 BTC
$0.002 --- 2/10 of 1¢
Satoshi
-
satoshi
0.00000001 BTC
$0.00002 --- 2/1000 of 1¢
[B][U]Why would bitcoin need to be divided into such tiny fractions?[/U][/B]
The answer lies in the [I][B]bitcoin protocol[/B][/I] – the original scheme devised for bitcoin by “Satoshi Nakamoto” (whoever he/they might be). The scheme is such that the financial incentive to “mine” bitcoin will diminish over time, until that incentive will effectively disappear when there are 21 million bitcoin in existence.
See — Bitcoin - Wikipedia
[B][U]A whole bunch of [I]if’s[/I][/U][/B]:
If the protocol plays out as designed, 21 million will be the final worldwide stock of bitcoin.
If bitcoin becomes established as a permanent (alternative) world currency, the value of each individual bitcoin will have to become enormous. Currently (as of January 2016), if all the money in circulation in the world (bank notes, coins, and bank deposits) were to be converted into USD, the total would be more than $80 trillion ($80,000,000,000,000.) That figure does not include the leveraged value of derivatives. See — Here’s all the money in the world, in one chart - MarketWatch
If we envision a bitcoin system in which there are enough bitcoin in existence to substitute for, say, 5% of the world’s money supply, then the world would need $4 trillion worth of bitcoin, given today’s market metrics. If the total stock of bitcoin is capped (by the bitcoin protocol) at 21 million bitcoin, then the price of BTC/USD will have to soar to $190,000 per bitcoin.
If 1 BTC = $190,000 —
— then 1 mBTC = $190, 1 bit (1 µBTC) = $0.19, and 1 satoshi = $0.0019 (19/100 of 1¢).
This thought-experiment does not account for the time factor. We are “equating” the ultimate stock of bitcoin [I]at some time in the future[/I] to an assumed percentage (5%) of [I]today’s[/I] worldwide stock of conventional currencies. But, the ultimate stock of bitcoin (21 million BTC in existence) is not projected (by the bitcoin protocol) to be reached before [I]the year 2140.[/I] A lot can happen in the next 123 years.
Suppose bitcoin gains traction; suppose its increasing use requires increased “mining”; suppose interest and confidence in bitcoin drives its price higher until the [B]bit[/B] achieves “parity” with the U.S. dollar; and suppose that all of this happens long before the year 2140.
In other words, in this [I]very[/I] hypothetical scenario, the ultimate worldwide stock of bitcoin would reach 21 million well ahead of schedule, and [B]1 bit would equal $1.[/B] Furthermore, the total value of bitcoin in existence would be slightly greater than 26% of the world’s money in circulation (based on the January 2016 money figures used in the example above), not 5% as supposed in that example.
[B][I]If[/I][/B] all of that were to occur, then all the cumbersome numbers in the table, above, would become very simple and easy to remember —
1 satoshi (we need a symbol for this!) – would be $0.01 (1¢)
1 bit (one µBTC) = 100 satoshi – would be $1
1 milli-bitcoin (one mBTC, should be renamed one kbit) = 1,000 bit – would be $1,000
1 bitcoin (BTC, or XBT*) = 1,000,000 bit – would be $1,000,000
Maybe those are the prices Satoshi Nakamoto had in mind from the beginning.
[B]*[/B] The following info was copied-and-pasted from – [B][I]bitcoin wiki[/I][/B]
[B]Currency code[/B]
The ISO 4217 currency code for Bitcoin is XBT. However, at the moment it is an unofficial code according to the ISO 4217 standard. The unit name BTC is also commonly used to represent one bitcoin, but it violates ISO 4217 because it begins with “BT”, the country code of Bhutan. Bhutan does not actually use the code BTC for any currency, and XBT has not yet defined which unit it represents (just that it represents some unit of bitcoin), so the Bitcoin community is likely to continue using mainly BTC as a unit name and currency code for some time.
A formal application by the Financial Standards Working Group of the Bitcoin Foundation is nearing completion [still true?]. This application would request ISO 4217 standard to support XBT.
.
The broker system for loading charts and execution is extremely fast, even faster than FXChoice in my opinion, thats 1 of 2 reason i like them, the second reason is their 1:500 leverage. But for leverage 1:500, i found out that when your equity goes above $5k, your leverage became 1:200, and if you trade and somehow your equity goes below $5k, you can’t have 1:500 leverage back, not for 30 days since your last leverage changed.
Their spread is very low, for major currencies, the spread is below 1 pips, well i am comparing them with FXChoice, and FXChoice pro account for AUDUSD and NZDUSD is around 1-2 pips, rarely goes below 1 pips. And their swap is a little bit higher than FXChoice but not as high as Trader’s way. Commission is lower than FXChoice.
The broker sites is ****ty as well as their support, they don’t have live support, and when you login to your account, it’s very unprofessional, unlike all other broker.
Well i withdraw money without problem, it takes 4 days for the money to reach my bank, i would probably stay with them if the leverage still 1:500, maybe one day i will try them again, when they update their sites and support. withdraw money is free with them (at least thats what on their site said, but it’s not), i got deducted $30 when my money arrives + $16 (my bank fee)
Well thats all folks, if you looking for broker with fast execution and lower spread, commission, higher leverage, i would recommend them, but don’t expect anything from their support and their sites. as for trustworthy or not, i can’t say anything on that matters, although they say that they are regulated, but i highly doubt that they are.
Hello Jinz,
I will include your comments in the LINKS in post #7, on the next update of the List.
Actually, it’s [I]Trade[U]Wise[/U]FX[/I] – but, we knew what you meant
.
.
I don’t know whether this is good news for us, or not.
This proposed new bank appears to offer hope for some relief from current money-transfer problems to and from offshore companies – specifically Caribbean offshore companies – and that may open up new money-transfer possibilities for the offshore forex brokers we deal with.
If this new bank gets up and running as planned, it will be open for business in the fall. We should keep an eye on this development, even as we continue to pursue other money-transfer solutions using bitcoin.
Excerpts from a BloombergBusinessWeek article:
The global campaign against money laundering combined with the Panama Papers made the Caribbean islands of sun, sand and offshore banking a near no-go zone for the world’s biggest banks.
So the British Virgin Islands has a solution: a bank to service offshore companies, many of them from China, locked out of the global banking system by HSBC Holdings Plc, Standard Chartered Plc and others. The new Bank of Asia (BVI) Ltd. is to begin operating online later this year.
“We have a captive client market of all these offshore companies that have had difficulties opening bank accounts, not for their own fault but because the legacy banks have stopped wanting them,” said Carson Wen, 64, a former acquisitions lawyer at Jones Day in Hong Kong and now founder and chairman of the bank. He plans to target the 200,000 out of 400,000-plus BVI companies that can’t get bank accounts.
In a speech in January, [BVI Prime Minister] Smith expressed hope that Bank of Asia “will mitigate against the restrictive banking practices that have impacted our incorporation numbers,” citing the effect of the Panama Papers’ revelations. Elise Donovan, director of the government’s BVI House Asia in Hong Kong, said in an emailed statement that the bank’s license was approved and that BVI officials were delighted.
Link to an msn.com reprint* of the Bloomberg article:
Next Chinese Offshore Play Could Be a New Bank in the Caribbean
* Note:
I saw this article in the print version of BloombergBusinessWeek (the May 22 - May 28 issue).
In the magazine the article was titled A New Caribbean Bank for Chinese Money.
Bloomberg is very restrictive regarding the sharing of their copyrighted material on the internet: only certain articles appear in bloombergbusinessweek.com. Links to Bloomberg articles posted in other sources usually fail, generating a 404 error message.
However, some sources apparently have permission from Bloomberg to redistribute certain material, and that’s how I came upon this reprint in msn.com. The title of the article is different, but the content is the same.
.
Hello Clint, I can’t appreciate enough as to how easily you can simplify most complex of the topics 
For the members of this thread, who have interest in bitcoins, I will share my research again by the end of this week.
Cheers