How long they been doing this for ?
Il make sure I stay away from them
Its so bad you have to even do that. Ive heard IC have done it too. We retail traders are always given the bad end of the stick. If it happens to you again make sure to post it maybe itll start to wake these brokers up who are doing it and let them know its not okay
Not good at all. Makes me angry when brokers do this. Have heard they have history of doing this.
has there been any comeback for this yet? has anyone been affected and seen a resolution. Keen to know how brokers will deal with this when the facts are presented infront of them.
How do we find out info on liquidity provider and tick volume? I would be keen to look into this.
The LP I think you’ll have to ask from the broker. I checked later and found that pepperstone has approx 22 LPs for choice, so there could be different behavior even among clients within pepperstone. Because they could be serviced by different LPs.
For tick volume I know you can get it in MT5 (only platform I’ve used so far). It should be fairly straightforward on other platforms too. On the charts you can right click and enable it to see volumetric data just below candles.
If you want to see specific tick volume numbers you can hover over the close of the candle to get the pop up or look below where they show the OHLC & volume #s:
If you want historic tick volume numbers then View > Currencies and click on “Export Bars” to download as csv
I don’t think you can discount IT issues in these instances either. These guys are expected to have top of the line IT infrastructure to minimize as much lag b/w both LPs and clients. If tech giants like Amazon, FB & Google can suffer outages, it’s not unrealistic that similar situations can also occur at either broker or LP. Unless there are many recurring instances I think it’s too quick to believe it’s broker manipulation.
3 Likes
Looks like Hugosway had some crazy candles too before your box, right?
Thats a really helpful post thanks! good to know where to find tick volume. I would say though you are defending them so much. Is it because they are regulated? i guarantee if this happened on an ‘unregulated’ broker there would be cries of scam/don’t use these. Why are Pepperstone given so much leeway?
BTW not targeting you specifically just saying the general trading public give reasons for pepperstone but will call out an ‘unregulated’ for much less without ever having used them themselves
I don’t think I am. I think concluding a broker is guilty of fraud on the basis of one chart is incorrect. Why would one instance of this chart be attributed to fraud, regulated or unregulated? Why isn’t anyone else considering the other more likely possibilities?
Why do you think I asked if it was the same LP b/w the 3 brokers? If different LPs then it makes no sense to compare their charts.
I would’ve said the same thing about any other broker, regulated or unregulated.
I don’t think that’s fair for unregulated brokers either. Especially if they are being called for much less.
1 Like
Oh yeah like im fully for transparency and if it was a liquidity provider issue then fair enough. I am not accusing pepperstone of fraud in the slightest. I called it an anomaly. It is clear though that amongst the 3 it is widely out of step and not by 5-10pips its by near 50.
My intention with this post is to alert other traders. I just feel people give ‘regulated’ too much weight and that these companies can do a lot and get away with a lot just for being regulated.
I dont advocate for any one unregulated broker either. I just want a fair and level playing field for all traders and i think whenever this happens with an unregulated broker it is highlighted and come down on hard yet with regulated so many give it a pass due who the broker is.
I really appreciate your contribution because you are knowledgable and fair. I am the same and if we continue to have these discussions and openness it is for all trader’s benefit.
I would hope that if it was unregulated you’d be as vigourous in the other options because some of them are really decent now and give ordinary people a chance to sit at the big boys table and trade properly without being restricted with tight leverage and tougher conditions.
Like someone said to me recently trading is one of the last avenues people can make it against the bigger entities in a industry and we need to look out and protect each other as retail traders we only have ourselves and our community we build.
1 Like
I didn’t realise they drew from 22 LPs. Interesting to know that. I assume that is quite common among some larger brokers?
Looks like it. There are some that have upto 50 apparently. But I’m not sure how reliable this source of information is. Could be outdated/inaccurate because I couldn’t find another source to validate this.
I’d also love to know how they determine which LP is assigned to a retail trader. If they vary day by day, ,say based on best execution, then there’s a change the PA/tick volume you see today will vary on other days.
Maybe some of the old timers in these forums may know.
Also found this information on Pepperstone at this site just now. Again, not sure how reliable this data is but there might be a way to validate the data.
This could be some marketing hype on behalf of the broker. But I’m wondering how they guys got enough information to determine that Pepperstone and IC Markets approach it the same way.
Also if both ICM and Pepperstone do this and possibly with the same LPs why the same price action wasn’t seen. Probably have to go to the horses mouth to get more info. As you say it would be interesting what this site’s source is.
That’s exactly why i’m using offshore brokers. Regulations means nothing. Pepperstone is one of the worst brokers and this is not their first manipulation lately but second or even third.
THEY DON’T ASSIGN Liquidity providers to retail traders …!
UNLESS you trade big money and win a lot then your not getting liquidity from these providers…!
The Brokers the Banks and the Exchanges are all in this to make money…!!
Multi million $ companies should not have to resort to dirty tactics … Bur they DO and the regulators do SOD ALL because they blame “POOR LIQUIDITY” or some other B/S…
there should be a cap on what the MAX spread can be then it would be a fairer game.
the word “RIGGED” comes to mind… !!!
1 Like
So many people don’t understand what retail Forex is. They think that a broker is going to give millions of people 500:1 leverage and have the cash to put all of these trades through to the real market 
They have 22 liquidity providers, and that allows them to do all sorts of manipulation, such as take whichever numbers suit them best. Broker has lost a bit of money today… take the highest ask and lowest bid prices to open the spread up and kill people in both directions… KERCHING!
Why are you taking things out of context? When did I claim clients were getting liquidity from LPs?
If you bothered reading the rest of the para it’s obvious I was referring to the tick volume as representative of the data provided by each LP. And yes there is an assignment of LPs to clients in some form or another. Otherwise I wouldn’t have LP tick data in my MT5 client.
No. It’s rigged because you want to believe it’s rigged based on one chart. That’s ridiculous.
Brokers and banks also suffer, like any other corporate from buggy software, crashes and malware. These are much more common than the “supposed” rigging you imply.
Too much speculation and conspiracy theory mongering. Have you mined and analyzed the data to prove without reasonable doubt that’s what’s happening?
Here’s another very rational explanation behind all the “conspiracy theory”. This explains how certain LPs just offset all their orders,as part of their operations, at once. This obviously impacts the market environment. Perfectly describes the earlier gap.