There are a few different prop models.
Typical Scam Model
Pay for training. They rebate you an account. The training cost more then the account they give you. Buyer beware.
Arcade Model
Trader puts up all the capital to get leverage and around PDT rules. This is the most common model. The key is you put your money up at risk.
No risk model
No risk. These fit the true prop definition in that trader puts up no risk capital. Only a few of these and difficult to get into them. Even so, some may have tight restrictions that make it difficult to profit.
Salary/draw/split model
This is similar to no risk model. Trader puts up no capital at risk but gets a salary/draw in addition to % returns.
Now, most props are either going to be discretionary style or quantitative.
From what I've seen most quant props are only interested in high frequency models. They are looking for a models that might trade again just extreme volume. This is probably not the type of stuff that an experienced CTA could model. Typically these edges might take a million to exploit and produce maybe 100k-200k per year. They don't produce huge return but they make money every single day and don't take much risk. They are mostly interested in risk free profits.
So, if you aren't a math wizard (like me) then you'll need to find a discretionary or other route. I do have strong rule-based strategies but nothing these firms would care for. You probably fall into same group as me.. it is not just rule based but you need to fit what they want: high frequency, modeling massive data, science degree..
It is specialized stuff. Hopefully we get some rules out that will end this HFT madness and put these mega geeks back to productive activities where they belong.
Typical Scam Model
Pay for training. They rebate you an account. The training cost more then the account they give you. Buyer beware.
Arcade Model
Trader puts up all the capital to get leverage and around PDT rules. This is the most common model. The key is you put your money up at risk.
No risk model
No risk. These fit the true prop definition in that trader puts up no risk capital. Only a few of these and difficult to get into them. Even so, some may have tight restrictions that make it difficult to profit.
Salary/draw/split model
This is similar to no risk model. Trader puts up no capital at risk but gets a salary/draw in addition to % returns.
Now, most props are either going to be discretionary style or quantitative.
From what I've seen most quant props are only interested in high frequency models. They are looking for a models that might trade again just extreme volume. This is probably not the type of stuff that an experienced CTA could model. Typically these edges might take a million to exploit and produce maybe 100k-200k per year. They don't produce huge return but they make money every single day and don't take much risk. They are mostly interested in risk free profits.
So, if you aren't a math wizard (like me) then you'll need to find a discretionary or other route. I do have strong rule-based strategies but nothing these firms would care for. You probably fall into same group as me.. it is not just rule based but you need to fit what they want: high frequency, modeling massive data, science degree..
It is specialized stuff. Hopefully we get some rules out that will end this HFT madness and put these mega geeks back to productive activities where they belong.
