10:1 could be the new leverage rule

Quote from southbeach4me:

Remember though, the govts's purpose is to lower volatility extremes, NOT reward the trader just bcuz he/she has more size an experience!...its NOT about you, its about maintaining the health of the market in general...
More...

That's a load of shit. Where do you suppose leverage originates from???

Retail forex accounts for >10% of daily volume.

The rest of the market (investment banks, banks and funds) can gear themselves to any degree they want - 1:1 , 20:1, 50:1, 100:1 !
 
Quote from Pippi436:

This makes no sense. The fact that they explicitly regulate only retail fx - as opposed to professional status trading(llc) or ECPs - would imply that this legislation comes from a consumer protection standpoint. But same consumers can still happily punt away in futures with 150+:1 intraday (~45:1 o/n) and piss away all their savings if they want.

Guessing its the CME-lobby trying to pimp their crappy emini and emicro fx-products though some creative legislation.
More...

Exactly right.
 
Quote from achilles28:

That's a load of shit. Where do you suppose leverage originates from???

Retail forex accounts for >10% of daily volume.

The rest of the market (investment banks, banks and funds) can gear themselves to any degree they want - 1:1 , 20:1, 50:1, 100:1 !
More...
Banks and professionals dont use 100:1 even 50:1 , u dont need this kind of leverage , ok maybe 50:1 for scalping w v tight stops but this is the max for small accounts also , but in general 25:1 is enough for professionals more than enough ....
 
The CFTC needs to mind it's fucking business and stick to policing bucketshops that routinely quote off-market prices or don't pay withdrawals. That's where it ends.

Retail volume accounts for what? 120 Billion in a 3.4 Trillion daily market? That's 4%. Big Deal. What's a leverage cap gonna do to such a tiny cross-section of the market?

These Government Clowns want to beef-up their street cred with a public outraged at Wallstreet. A 10:1 leverage cap passes the smell test for an ignorant public clueless it'll only hurt 1-lot pikers and leave Wallstreet unmolested. And, like the other guy said, the CME is likely pulling strings to herd volume over to futures, which, incidentally, have 10 TIMES the leverage this new CFTC proposal has !! More Government Bullshit.

We need LESS regulation. Not more.

If a gambler wants to blow out a 1K account at 300:1, FINE. THAT'S HIS BUSINESS.

People do it in Vegas, State-Run Casinos and (State-Run) Lotteries, all the time. We don't see the Government turning away habitual losers at their tables and lotto kiosks, do we????

Bunch of hypocrites. We are all adults. If someone wants to open a brokerage account, and they lose money, that's their choice. They CHOSE to accept those consequences beforehand. The Government has no place in it, either way.

If anything close to this passes, US Retail FX will die. Volume will migrate to overseas brokers and futures.

FXCM and the rest of the Big Retailer's better get off their asses and lobby hard. That's all America has been reduced to anyway - lobbyists and special interest money. This corrupt sham of system better help the little guy for once !
 
Quote from Surprise:

Banks and professionals dont use 100:1 even 50:1 , u dont need this kind of leverage , ok maybe 50:1 for scalping w v tight stops but this is the max for small accounts also , but in general 25:1 is enough for professionals more than enough ....
More...

Professionals are trading 7-figure accounts. Are retailers? No.

And who are you (or the CFTC) to say, 25:1 is "enough". Isn't that a decision between the broker and trader?

And if leverage should be capped at 25 to 1, why is it okay for futures to be geared at 100:1, in some instances? And 50:1, in most?

It's this Big Brother mentality that's killing America. It's none of your business how other traders and brokers choose to arrange the terms of dealings. Really.

200:1 might be excessive, but I'd defend it. Simply because it's none of my business to oppose it !
 
Quote from achilles28:

Professionals are trading 7-figure accounts. Are retailers? No.

And who are you (or the CFTC) to say, 25:1 is "enough". Isn't that a decision between the broker and trader?

And if leverage should be capped at 25 to 1, why is it okay for futures to be geared at 100:1, in some instances? And 50:1, in most?

It's this Big Brother mentality that's killing America. It's none of your business how other traders and brokers choose to arrange the terms of dealings. Really.

200:1 might be excessive, but I'd defend it. Simply because it's none of my business to oppose it !
More...

Ofcourse at the end its up to u , but i am talking about sucessful trading point of view not from the reglation side , i dont care u want to use 400:1 or 100:1 go use it i didnt stop u . Its like someone says the right way is not to risk more than 2% then u say to him it is not your bussiness , go trade 400:1 who cares , infact i can help u to find 700:1 brokers if u want and they r regulated by the FSA , i dont have time for this s***
 
leverage is suicidal.....I never trade above 3:1.

all those gamblers trading 10:1 and above.........Why not go to the casino instead? Put it all on black and have a free frink?
 
near 2003, in Las Vegas a man put everything he had on the red ( sold his home, car, everything... he just had clothes... )...

He played one roulette shot with all his money on the red ( or black I don't remember )...

Thinking that if he lose, he will start somewhere else...

He won :cool: !
 
Quote from achilles28:

The CFTC needs to mind it's fucking business and stick to policing bucketshops that routinely quote off-market prices or don't pay withdrawals. That's where it ends.

Retail volume accounts for what? 120 Billion in a 3.4 Trillion daily market? That's 4%. Big Deal. What's a leverage cap gonna do to such a tiny cross-section of the market?

These Government Clowns want to beef-up their street cred with a public outraged at Wallstreet. A 10:1 leverage cap passes the smell test for an ignorant public clueless it'll only hurt 1-lot pikers and leave Wallstreet unmolested. And, like the other guy said, the CME is likely pulling strings to herd volume over to futures, which, incidentally, have 10 TIMES the leverage this new CFTC proposal has !! More Government Bullshit.

We need LESS regulation. Not more.

If a gambler wants to blow out a 1K account at 300:1, FINE. THAT'S HIS BUSINESS.

People do it in Vegas, State-Run Casinos and (State-Run) Lotteries, all the time. We don't see the Government turning away habitual losers at their tables and lotto kiosks, do we????

Bunch of hypocrites. We are all adults. If someone wants to open a brokerage account, and they lose money, that's their choice. They CHOSE to accept those consequences beforehand. The Government has no place in it, either way.

If anything close to this passes, US Retail FX will die. Volume will migrate to overseas brokers and futures.

FXCM and the rest of the Big Retailer's better get off their asses and lobby hard. That's all America has been reduced to anyway - lobbyists and special interest money. This corrupt sham of system better help the little guy for once !
More...

Well said!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top