You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Wts Proprietary Trading Group, Llc
- Thread starter LCFXTRADER
- Start date
Quote from Shanb:
Idk what firms you are calling but this is not my experience!
OP you should ask around a bit more. When I first started at my firm, I got charged .004/share and when I went to other firms they offered better. In fact, they told me I was getting ripped off!
Depends on what the training is like as well, most of these types of firms don't offer any substantial training. The model just doesn't provide any incentive for it.
If you trade 500,000 shares/month with .005/share you are paying 500 dollars/month in commissions alone. Does not count any desk fees or the like! That's a very hard way to make money when every month you are giving 10%+ of your account away on commissions alone! What are your goals and what are you trying to accomplish?
.004-.005 is fair. especially if u do under 100k shares/month but it's by no means getting ripped off. Paying $1 per thousand is getting ripped off. Paying $4-5/1k for under 200k shares is not a rip off. it's what most firms will charge you.
evo
actually most prop firms do accept 5k from any trader
commission cost is based on total share volume traded monthly
how much risk deposit a trader puts up should have no bearing on commission cost
active pro traders usually trade 1million shares plus monthly
If a trader is doing 500k shares a month they should not pay more then .003 with any firm
unless they are getting some training then it makes sense
actually most prop firms do accept 5k from any trader
commission cost is based on total share volume traded monthly
how much risk deposit a trader puts up should have no bearing on commission cost
active pro traders usually trade 1million shares plus monthly
If a trader is doing 500k shares a month they should not pay more then .003 with any firm
unless they are getting some training then it makes sense
Quote from hitnrun:
how much risk deposit a trader puts up should have no bearing on commission cost
unless they are getting some training then it makes sense
hitnrun,
small accounts ($1500-$5000) hold much more risk for the firm. Anyone leveraged at 10:1 or even 20:1 with $2,000 in their account can easily get halted while a trader short in a stock and accumulate massive loses for them firm (6 figures). I've seen it happen. Most traders will not pay back loses if their accounts go negative. That's just been my experience in working with prop firms for a few years.
I definitely think someone putting up 2k shouldn't get the same commission rates as someone putting up 20k.
The odds of the trader with 2k in his account generating enough commissions to cover overhead like risk-management (riskier as the accounts get smaller), rent, etc. are very slim.
Firms providing leverage do take on that risk. To take on that risk for someone who is pretty much gambling (what you are doing trying to make income off $1500-$5000).
the fact is most traders would rather open a account with 5k for many reasons
The size of the account does not prevent risk nor help one be profitable
2 traders with the same size account & experience can have totally different rates based on how they neg their individual deal
this is for a real prop account not the noob training programs
some traders just take the deal that is offered to them
while others only pay what they know is a competitive commission
traders with big or small size accounts usually pay similiar commissions
for those that do not know how to neg will be screwed without even a kiss
to each his own
The size of the account does not prevent risk nor help one be profitable
2 traders with the same size account & experience can have totally different rates based on how they neg their individual deal
this is for a real prop account not the noob training programs
some traders just take the deal that is offered to them
while others only pay what they know is a competitive commission
traders with big or small size accounts usually pay similiar commissions
for those that do not know how to neg will be screwed without even a kiss
to each his own
hitnrun,
you forgot one big category: the gamblers. There are traders who don't see a trade as a risk-reward scenario, but more like a hand of cards.
Back when I traded with some smaller prop firms, I've literally witnessed independent traders who had a strategy of going to finviz.com and shorting the highest winners / longing the biggest losers of the day.
One day, some health care stock got halted with a trader in short. He had something like 1000 shares at $15. FDA approved the stock and the next morning the stock opened at $24. The trader lost his 4k deposit and another 5k of the firm's capital. He didn't end up paying it back.
Size of account does matter. You simply can't realistically put up 2,000 and expect to earn any type of income on that, other that a few pennies and most traders are not that disciplined to manage a 2000 account. it allows too limit margin for error.
In my experience, the traders who came and went the quickest have always been traders who deposited under 5k. The costs of bearing a professional trading account is just too high for a 2,000 balance to pay all the associated fees like desk, commission, regulatory, etc. while still having room for loses.
If someone wants to put up 2,000 that's fine. I just think it's bad business for a firm to accept traders that are willing to expose the firm without taking on their own risk.
you forgot one big category: the gamblers. There are traders who don't see a trade as a risk-reward scenario, but more like a hand of cards.
Back when I traded with some smaller prop firms, I've literally witnessed independent traders who had a strategy of going to finviz.com and shorting the highest winners / longing the biggest losers of the day.
One day, some health care stock got halted with a trader in short. He had something like 1000 shares at $15. FDA approved the stock and the next morning the stock opened at $24. The trader lost his 4k deposit and another 5k of the firm's capital. He didn't end up paying it back.
Size of account does matter. You simply can't realistically put up 2,000 and expect to earn any type of income on that, other that a few pennies and most traders are not that disciplined to manage a 2000 account. it allows too limit margin for error.
In my experience, the traders who came and went the quickest have always been traders who deposited under 5k. The costs of bearing a professional trading account is just too high for a 2,000 balance to pay all the associated fees like desk, commission, regulatory, etc. while still having room for loses.
If someone wants to put up 2,000 that's fine. I just think it's bad business for a firm to accept traders that are willing to expose the firm without taking on their own risk.
Quote from EvOTrAdEr:
hitnrun,
you forgot one big category: the gamblers. There are traders who don't see a trade as a risk-reward scenario, but more like a hand of cards.
Back when I traded with some smaller prop firms, I've literally witnessed independent traders who had a strategy of going to finviz.com and shorting the highest winners / longing the biggest losers of the day.
One day, some health care stock got halted with a trader in short. He had something like 1000 shares at $15. FDA approved the stock and the next morning the stock opened at $24. The trader lost his 4k deposit and another 5k of the firm's capital. He didn't end up paying it back.
Size of account does matter. You simply can't realistically put up 2,000 and expect to earn any type of income on that, other that a few pennies and most traders are not that disciplined to manage a 2000 account. it allows too limit margin for error.
In my experience, the traders who came and went the quickest have always been traders who deposited under 5k. The costs of bearing a professional trading account is just too high for a 2,000 balance to pay all the associated fees like desk, commission, regulatory, etc. while still having room for loses.
If someone wants to put up 2,000 that's fine. I just think it's bad business for a firm to accept traders that are willing to expose the firm without taking on their own risk.
What ever happened to having some prudent risk management in place? You can't justify those types of commissions from your argument...any firm that has such a disregard for risk management deserves to lose money!
evo
you keep talking about 2k accounts for some reason ?
Your stuck on noobs with small accounts that often get burned
I was talking about 5k accounts & higher & pro traders
even the trader with a 50 k or 100k account . if they do not know how to manage risk they may blow up
If someone is going to approach trading like it's gambling then they deserve to lose their money
when people lose money repeatedly then hopefully they wise up & change their ways
you keep talking about 2k accounts for some reason ?
Your stuck on noobs with small accounts that often get burned
I was talking about 5k accounts & higher & pro traders
even the trader with a 50 k or 100k account . if they do not know how to manage risk they may blow up
If someone is going to approach trading like it's gambling then they deserve to lose their money
when people lose money repeatedly then hopefully they wise up & change their ways