Best US forex brokers - List of forex brokers regulated by ...
Best US forex brokers - List of forex brokers regulated by ...
Forex.com Review 2020 - Pros and Cons Uncovered
FOREX.com Reviews Read Customer Service Reviews of www ...
Top 7 Best US Forex Brokers 2020 [Forex Brokers Accepting ...
USA Forex Signal Review (usaforexsignal.com) - Forex Robot ...
Forex.com Forex Broker Reviews Gain Capital Forex ...
# List of 23 best Forex Brokers 2020 Trusted reviews & test
3 Best US Forex Brokers for 2020 - ForexBrokers.com
3 Best Forex Brokers in USA 2021 - Top Brokers for US Traders
USA Forex Signal Bewertung - USAForexSignal.com Scam oder ...
A place for redditors to discuss quantitative trading, statistical methods, econometrics, programming, implementation, automated strategies, and bounce ideas off each other for constructive criticism. Feel free to submit papers/links of things you find interesting.
No blind buying! See the proof for 286 pips in #EURCAD! And you can reach us 24x7, and get more proofs and user reviews for the performance of the real-time, #norepaintindicator #Pipbreaker. Then go for it & make progress in your forex life. https://wetalktrade.com/best-indicator-for-mt4/
http://twitter.com/forex_in_world/status/1169781000194416645#forex #forextrading Top 9 Forexbrokerinc Reviews USA-Regulated & US Clients. »» https://t.co/yfcS5IzFSz pic.twitter.com/xjWSrF80A9— FOREX IN WORLD (@forex_in_world) September 6, 2019
http://twitter.com/forex_in_world/status/1152869618312196097#forex #forextrading Top 9 Forexbrokerinc Reviews USA-Regulated & US Clients. »» https://t.co/7zIrCTmJWB pic.twitter.com/H0aIukZ7fP— FOREX IN WORLD (@forex_in_world) July 21, 2019
http://twitter.com/forex_in_world/status/1146739335364063234#forex #forextrading Top 9 Forexbrokerinc Reviews USA-Regulated & US Clients. »» https://t.co/6IZg85HfBz pic.twitter.com/qcgUwKtEMr— FOREX IN WORLD (@forex_in_world) July 4, 2019
http://twitter.com/forex_in_world/status/1143780297126928384#forex #forextrading Top 9 Forexbrokerinc Reviews USA-Regulated & US Clients. »» https://t.co/eHPBrBUDVq pic.twitter.com/JecbhMY7ho— FOREX IN WORLD (@forex_in_world) June 26, 2019
For Canadian Clients of VantageFX (or Canadian Forex Traders in General)
As you likely already know, VantageFX will no longer service Canadians residents as of Nov 30th. This is unfortunate, since VantageFX has done an excellent job serving Canadian clients with higher leverage account options from a well regulated and trusted broker. Through contacts in the industry, we've been made aware of a new retail account offering at Pacific Union. Pacific Union has a good history of servicing institutional accounts and has only just started taking on retail clients, but they are positioned to service the Canadian clients in the space that VantageFX has left behind. Further, we were made aware of Pacific Union first by contacts at VantageFX, and then this recommendation was backed up by a trusted source who works closely with both companies. Again, to be very clear, this post isn't to give undue attention to some random broker.. we are providing this info because Pacific Union is a proper alternative for Canadian based traders that will no longer be serviced by VantageFX. On that note, I've updated the wiki to include Pacific Union Prime - https://puprime.com: Subreddit's Canadian Brokers Wiki Page The only major difference I have noticed so far is lacking MT5, but the word is that Pacific Union will be reviewing MT5 and other enhancements to their offing next quarter after they get past the launch of their retail offering. Key highlights from my perspective:
Up to 500:1 leverage available for Canadians, and while that much leverage may not be needed, even just 100:1 is decent compared to ~33:1 leverage set by IIROC with onshore brokers.
Client funds are segregated at an Australian bank, so you're getting some overlap of Aussie banking / regulatory rules and that's a huge plus when it comes to safety of funds and the finance side of things
No fee on credit card deposits / withdrawals, and no fee on Visa Debit and MasterCard Debit deposit / withdrawals. Transactions are completed within 30 minutes.
No fee on Interac e-Transfer deposits.
Remember, going offshore means you lose CIPF protection on funds, so a well vetted and properly regulated broker is a must! UPDATE #1: Oct 6th: Took this post off sticky and redacted some info as the connection between VantageFX and Pacific Union Prime was not "official". Pacific Union is still a great alternative / replacement for Canadian clients seeing higher leverage accounts and who are no longer serviced after VantageFX left Canada. UPDATE #2, Oct 8th: Adjusted this thread again to best reflect where Pacific Union Prime fits with VantageFX and former Canadian VantageFX cleints.
No Agent Taobao Direct Buying Guide! Let's view all baby and determine
Taobao Direct Guide for users familiar with 3rd party agents and navigating taobao (with chrome google translate on, hence the title)
Taobao direct consolidation and shipping is available in the following countries: USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan. This review is primarily geared towards the US as that’s where I live.
What is Taobao direct? Basically instead of copying and pasting the item URL into the agent website, you add items to your cart like a regular ecommerce site, check out, wait for items to arrive in the warehouse (similar to what happens when you use an agent) and then when all your items from various sellers are in, you request the logistics company to send everything to you. Disclaimer: I have no Chinese fluency written or otherwise. I did everything through Google translate and my experience with how tb works through agents. If something goes wrong I will probably write off the item 🤣 if you communicate a lot with the ts who use translators it also helps get your point across. If you type in English in tb live chat they will redirect you to the HK/tw help staff who have medium English. Also I bought items I purchased previously with an agent or vouched for here on RL or had crazy high reviews/ratings. Pros:
Duck the agent fees and exchange rate bs
Shipping is cheaper but EMS is the only option right now
If you are overcharged for shipping you can get a refund
It’s also easier to collect the discounts and coupons from stores (ymmv with agent)
Not good for reps or mainstream branded rep items as they can be marked as contraband by taobao and then you have to get a refund and return to the seller
You pay 5% sales tax (see note at the end) and 3% on the total payment through alipay with a foreign cc (regardless if your cc does not charge forex)
No qc pics and can't really control the declared value if that matters
Other categories of items like make up brushes, liquids, powders, sharps, etc. are not eligible
20 day hold limit apparently every day after that is charged 1 yuan per item per day
I think the ideal usage for taobao direct would be light items like innerwear, jewelry, soft/non fragile goods, generally clothing and shoes although I don’t know if they will include the box by default. Please see here for the image guide for ordering Sorry in advance if my descriptions are wonky, I'm not great at following OR writing instructions but hopefully the screenshots make it easier to follow along.
Create an account (there are various guides out there for overseas members) and go into your account and add your home address (or the superbuy warehouse address)
Find your items and change the delivery location to "overseas", add to cart
When you're ready to check out hit check out, enter your cc info on the alipay (remember to use a card that doesn't charge foreign transaction fees) and confirm it goes through.
Wait for all your stuff to come in. When its in the tb warehouse it will show up in the "consolidated delivery" section tagged with a weight (usually volumetric or actual). The 20 day countdown will start once its available for international shipping.
After all your items are in, or you can batch up by selecting items on the consolidated delivery page, submit for delivery. Pay again through alipay.
Use the check logistics option to get the tracking info and wait for your haul!
After receiving but before you open, take photos of it on a scale and the lxwxh with a ruler as well. This is because they will overestimate your shipping but there isn't rehearsal shipping like with agents. You can request a refund after the fact with the "refund/complaint" option on the consolidated delivery page (mine says check refund because I've already gone through it)
Getting a refund: select the "only refund" option, "goods received" and "shipping cost does not match" and leave the full shipping amount in. Upload your measurement and weight photos (make sure the file size is not too big). Within 72hr they will reply and ask you to modify your application with the real amount owed (if any). It will go back to your cc through alipay (may take a few days).
Cost comparison: Even after the 5% sales tax and 3% alipay, it cost me $6.20 total from my credit card statement. A 39 yuan top up for sb is $6.53 as of today (if using paypal). For some the qc pictures and the longer storage period are well worth the difference. However a good compromise is the parcel forwarding option in sb. Instead of shipping to your house you can set up superbuy’s warehouse address and pay in taobao and wait for your items to show up in sb. You also have to submit the item link and the tracking # in superbuy so they can find your stuff. There's no sales tax and usually no shipping and you can select the coupons you want. I had a pair of pants make it to the sb warehouse almost 24hr after ordering, and another 24hr after entering my shipping info and item link in sb, it showed up in my account with free (non hd) pictures of the item. Then I cried putting together the shipping parcel lol. This is a good way to dodge the sales tax and hold items for longer. However then you're at the mercy of the shipping costs (but you do have more options for delivery lines and you can customize how you want your items packaged too). The taobao warehouse will really throw everything in there, probably in a poly envelope. The taobao shipping rates are 90yuan for the first .5kg and 48 yuan per every .5 after which is very competitive even after accounting for volumetric weight. Sb ems starts at 186 for the first .5kg and 61y every .5kg after. Of course rates and terms are subject to change with the times. I had a package that came in at 277g when I measured it at home but I was charged for 1.6kg. After sending in the package images they refunded 144yuan (the true volumetric weight was about .97kg.) Taobao volumetric calculation is lxwxh (cm)/6000. Timeline wise I submitted 8/16 and received 8/28 although I think because it was so light they used epacket/china post because it was not an EMS tracking # big sigh. Still less than 10 days can't complain. Hope this helps! I'm sure I missed something on this guide so feel free to leave any questions and I will update the post accordingly. Apologies this is very us-centric, I also cannot comment on getting a refund or exchange from sellers before you ship out but there is now english support (albeit a bit wonky) through chat and aliwangwang+google translate can get you pretty far. Ps: highly recommend using the app too as its easier to get chat messages from the seller. You can screenshot and upload images to Google translate to read the text.
Forex Signals App on iTunes Read reviews, get customer ratings, see screenshots, and learn more about Forex Signals on the App Store. Download Forex Signals and enjoy it on your iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/forex-signals/id882296265
I’ve been looking for a broker that has an API for index futures and ideally also futures options. I’m looking to use the API to build a customized view of my risk based on balances, positions, and market conditions. Searching the algotrading sub I found many API-related posts, but then when I actually read them and their comments, I found they’re often lacking in real substance. It turns out many brokers or data services that have APIs don’t actually support index futures and options via the API, and instead they focus on equities, forex, or cypto. So here’s the list of what I’ve found so far. This isn’t a review of these brokers or APIs and note that I have a specific application in mind (index futures and futures options). Perhaps you’re looking for an API for equities, or you just want data and not a broker, in which case there may be a few options. Also, I’m based in the US so I didn’t really look for brokers or platforms outside the US. If you have experience with these APIs, please chime in with your thoughts. Also, I may have missed some brokers or platforms. If I did or if you see anything that needs correction please let me know.
Broker with a variety of platforms including CQG, Rithmic, TT, some with APIs
Wow, this list grew longer than I originally thought it would be. If you spot a mistake, please let me know and I’ll correct it. Edit: - added Lightspeed API - updated Dashprime to indicate some of the APIs available - added Medved Trader to table - added marketstack to table
Forex Daily Review: US Economic Data to hint on the QE Trigger
This article gives an update on, how the US Federal Reserve could start printing more dollars, which would have the effect of devaluing the currency. This follows the weaker than expected employment data from March. Also included is a technical observation of the AUD/CAD pair.
Dollar's farewell performance. Review as of 30.10.2020
What is good for the greenback is good for Trump. Does the current White House tenant have a chance to keep his chair?
Can the USD index's rise right before the election be a tribute to retiring Trump?
Those Americans are so strange: less than a week is left, and they still don't know who will be the president! Financial markets appear not to understand that either. The S&P 500's fall on the eve of the election indicates that the party in power's candidate will lose. The ratings indicate the same, but the US dollar is growing by leaps and bounds, while investors know: what is good for the greenback is good for Donald Trump. Can the Republican still have a chance? Or is it the USD's farewell performance for Trump? https://preview.redd.it/05ez9n4828w51.jpg?width=1164&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eab79fbf5beec7a869becfef8bb8197116dc1b96 Even if we forget about the pandemic and trade wars, we'll see that a weak dollar has run all through Trump's presidency. The US' 45th president did his best to weaken the greenback, accusing China and Europe of manipulating their currencies, asking the Fed to cut rates and revive QE, and calling Jerome Powell the USA's main enemy. In the end, things didn't go the way Trump wanted. The USD index was consolidating stably from the beginning of 2018 and up to May 2020. The strong economy helped the Fed raise rates several times, which other central banks couldn't afford. Tax cuts and deregulation became a boon for US companies and the whole stock market. That drove capital to the USA and strengthened the dollar. The trading war slowed global trading down, cut the euro's rate, and boosted demand for safe-haven assets. The greenback won all the same. https://preview.redd.it/0p75min828w51.jpg?width=1164&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c833d6501df48d672fecb6b4f1340304394b0ff3 The US' 45th president will enter history books as a man who spoiled everything and as a man who first speaks and then thinks. His attempts to describe things better than they are make everybody smile and make him lose his authority. Trust is like paper: once creased, it's hard to smooth it out. Trump called the US' Q3 GDP growth "best in history" and said the year 2021 would be fantastic. However, Sleepy Biden's tax hike may "kill it all"! In fact, the US economy is now 3.5% worse than at the beginning of 2019. To get back to the previous figures, it needs to expand 15% in Q4, which is practically impossible. The current president is to be blamed for that too, as anti-pandemic measures weren't taken in good time. People say a clever man admits his faults, a cunning man blames others, and a stupid man is proud of them. Sounds true. The key-note of Donald Trump's presidency was looking for a scapegoat. It was either China or Jerome Powell. The president's opponents would keep silent, understanding what consequences return criticism may have. Joe Biden won't keep silent. He says recovery is slowing down or even standing still, while the current high GDP value doesn't help millions of ordinary Americans who have lost their jobs. https://preview.redd.it/os6pk6vm28w51.jpg?width=1164&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b04eff9aac40e66083524f9bf71674d8d98c0a03 What frightens me the most is that the new US president is neither Trump nor Biden...but Alzheimer! For more information follow the link to the website of the LiteForex https://www.liteforex.com/blog/chatty-forex/dollars-farewell-performance-review-as-of-30102020/?uid=285861726&cid=62423
Disclaimer: None of this is financial advice. I have no idea what I'm doing. Please do your own research or you will certainly lose money. I'm not a statistician, data scientist, well-seasoned trader, or anything else that would qualify me to make statements such as the below with any weight behind them. Take them for the incoherent ramblings that they are. TL;DR at the bottom for those not interested in the details. This is a bit of a novel, sorry about that. It was mostly for getting my own thoughts organized, but if even one person reads the whole thing I will feel incredibly accomplished.
For those of you not familiar, please see the various threads on this trading system here. I can't take credit for this system, all glory goes to ParallaxFX! I wanted to see how effective this system was at H1 for a couple of reasons: 1) My current broker is TD Ameritrade - their Forex minimum is a mini lot, and I don't feel comfortable enough yet with the risk to trade mini lots on the higher timeframes(i.e. wider pip swings) that ParallaxFX's system uses, so I wanted to see if I could scale it down. 2) I'm fairly impatient, so I don't like to wait days and days with my capital tied up just to see if a trade is going to win or lose. This does mean it requires more active attention since you are checking for setups once an hour instead of once a day or every 4-6 hours, but the upside is that you trade more often this way so you end up winning or losing faster and moving onto the next trade. Spread does eat more of the trade this way, but I'll cover this in my data below - it ends up not being a problem. I looked at data from 6/11 to 7/3 on all pairs with a reasonable spread(pairs listed at bottom above the TL;DR). So this represents about 3-4 weeks' worth of trading. I used mark(mid) price charts. Spreadsheet link is below for anyone that's interested.
I'm pretty much using ParallaxFX's system textbook, but since there are a few options in his writeups, I'll include all the discretionary points here:
I'm using the stop entry version - so I wait for the price to trade beyond the confirmation candle(in the direction of my trade) before entering. I don't have any data to support this decision, but I've always preferred this method over retracement-limit entries. Maybe I just like the feeling of a higher winrate even though there can be greater R:R using a limit entry. Variety is the spice of life.
I put my stop loss right at the opposite edge of the confirmation candle. NOT at the edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. I'll get into this more below - not enough trades are saved to justify the wider stops. (Wider stop means less $ per pip won, assuming you still only risk 1%).
All my profit/loss statistics are based on a 1% risk per trade. Because 1 is real easy to multiply.
There are definitely some questionable trades in here, but I tried to make it as mechanical as possible for evaluation purposes. They do fit the definitions of the system, which is why I included them. You could probably improve the winrate by being more discretionary about your trades by looking at support/resistance or other techniques.
I didn't use MBB much for either entering trades, or as support/resistance indicators. Again, trying to be pretty mechanical here just for data collection purposes. Plus, we all make bad trading decisions now and then, so let's call it even.
As stated in the title, this is for H1 only. These results may very well not play out for other time frames - who knows, it may not even work on H1 starting this Monday. Forex is an unpredictable place.
I collected data to show efficacy of taking profit at three different levels: -61.8%, -100% and -161.8% fib levels described in the system using the passive trade management method(set it and forget it). I'll have more below about moving up stops and taking off portions of a position.
And now for the fun. Results!
Total Trades: 241
TP at -61.8%: 177 out of 241: 73.44%
TP at -100%: 156 out of 241: 64.73%
TP at -161.8%: 121 out of 241: 50.20%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 5.22%
TP at -100%: 23.55%
TP at -161.8%: 29.14%
As you can see, a higher target ended up with higher profit despite a much lower winrate. This is partially just how things work out with profit targets in general, but there's an additional point to consider in our case: the spread. Since we are trading on a lower timeframe, there is less overall price movement and thus the spread takes up a much larger percentage of the trade than it would if you were trading H4, Daily or Weekly charts. You can see exactly how much it accounts for each trade in my spreadsheet if you're interested. TDA does not have the best spreads, so you could probably improve these results with another broker. EDIT: I grabbed typical spreads from other brokers, and turns out while TDA is pretty competitive on majors, their minors/crosses are awful! IG beats them by 20-40% and Oanda beats them 30-60%! Using IG spreads for calculations increased profits considerably (another 5% on top) and Oanda spreads increased profits massively (another 15%!). Definitely going to be considering another broker than TDA for this strategy. Plus that'll allow me to trade micro-lots, so I can be more granular(and thus accurate) with my position sizing and compounding.
A Note on Spread
As you can see in the data, there were scenarios where the spread was 80% of the overall size of the trade(the size of the confirmation candle that you draw your fibonacci retracements over), which would obviously cut heavily into your profits. Removing any trades where the spread is more than 50% of the trade width improved profits slightly without removing many trades, but this is almost certainly just coincidence on a small sample size. Going below 40% and even down to 30% starts to cut out a lot of trades for the less-common pairs, but doesn't actually change overall profits at all(~1% either way). However, digging all the way down to 25% starts to really make some movement. Profit at the -161.8% TP level jumps up to 37.94% if you filter out anything with a spread that is more than 25% of the trade width! And this even keeps the sample size fairly large at 187 total trades. You can get your profits all the way up to 48.43% at the -161.8% TP level if you filter all the way down to only trades where spread is less than 15% of the trade width, however your sample size gets much smaller at that point(108 trades) so I'm not sure I would trust that as being accurate in the long term. Overall based on this data, I'm going to only take trades where the spread is less than 25% of the trade width. This may bias my trades more towards the majors, which would mean a lot more correlated trades as well(more on correlation below), but I think it is a reasonable precaution regardless.
Time of Day
Time of day had an interesting effect on trades. In a totally predictable fashion, a vast majority of setups occurred during the London and New York sessions: 5am-12pm Eastern. However, there was one outlier where there were many setups on the 11PM bar - and the winrate was about the same as the big hours in the London session. No idea why this hour in particular - anyone have any insight? That's smack in the middle of the Tokyo/Sydney overlap, not at the open or close of either. On many of the hour slices I have a feeling I'm just dealing with small number statistics here since I didn't have a lot of data when breaking it down by individual hours. But here it is anyway - for all TP levels, these three things showed up(all in Eastern time):
7pm-4am: Fewer setups, but winrate high.
5am-6am: Lots of setups, but but winrate low.
12pm-3pm Medium number of setups, but winrate low.
I don't have any reason to think these timeframes would maintain this behavior over the long term. They're almost certainly meaningless. EDIT: When you de-dup highly correlated trades, the number of trades in these timeframes really drops, so from this data there is no reason to think these timeframes would be any different than any others in terms of winrate. That being said, these time frames work out for me pretty well because I typically sleep 12am-7am Eastern time. So I automatically avoid the 5am-6am timeframe, and I'm awake for the majority of this system's setups.
Moving stops up to breakeven
This section goes against everything I know and have ever heard about trade management. Please someone find something wrong with my data. I'd love for someone to check my formulas, but I realize that's a pretty insane time commitment to ask of a bunch of strangers. Anyways. What I found was that for these trades moving stops up...basically at all...actually reduced the overall profitability. One of the data points I collected while charting was where the price retraced back to after hitting a certain milestone. i.e. once the price hit the -61.8% profit level, how far back did it retrace before hitting the -100% profit level(if at all)? And same goes for the -100% profit level - how far back did it retrace before hitting the -161.8% profit level(if at all)? Well, some complex excel formulas later and here's what the results appear to be. Emphasis on appears because I honestly don't believe it. I must have done something wrong here, but I've gone over it a hundred times and I can't find anything out of place.
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 5.36%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): -1.01% (yes, a net loss)
Now, you might think exactly what I did when looking at these numbers: oof, the spread killed us there right? Because even when you move your SL to 0%, you still end up paying the spread, so it's not truly "breakeven". And because we are trading on a lower timeframe, the spread can be pretty hefty right? Well even when I manually modified the data so that the spread wasn't subtracted(i.e. "Breakeven" was truly +/- 0), things don't look a whole lot better, and still way worse than the passive trade management method of leaving your stops in place and letting it run. And that isn't even a realistic scenario because to adjust out the spread you'd have to move your stoploss inside the candle edge by at least the spread amount, meaning it would almost certainly be triggered more often than in the data I collected(which was purely based on the fib levels and mark price). Regardless, here are the numbers for that scenario:
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 46.4%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 17.97%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%
Winrate(breakeven doesn't count as a win): 65.97%
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 11.60%
From a literal standpoint, what I see behind this behavior is that 44 of the 69 breakeven trades(65%!) ended up being profitable to -100% after retracing deeply(but not to the original SL level), which greatly helped offset the purely losing trades better than the partial profit taken at -61.8%. And 36 went all the way back to -161.8% after a deep retracement without hitting the original SL. Anyone have any insight into this? Is this a problem with just not enough data? It seems like enough trades that a pattern should emerge, but again I'm no expert. I also briefly looked at moving stops to other lower levels (78.6%, 61.8%, 50%, 38.2%, 23.6%), but that didn't improve things any. No hard data to share as I only took a quick look - and I still might have done something wrong overall. The data is there to infer other strategies if anyone would like to dig in deep(more explanation on the spreadsheet below). I didn't do other combinations because the formulas got pretty complicated and I had already answered all the questions I was looking to answer.
2-Candle vs Confirmation Candle Stops
Another interesting point is that the original system has the SL level(for stop entries) just at the outer edge of the 2-candle pattern that makes up the system. Out of pure laziness, I set up my stops just based on the confirmation candle. And as it turns out, that is much a much better way to go about it. Of the 60 purely losing trades, only 9 of them(15%) would go on to be winners with stops on the 2-candle formation. Certainly not enough to justify the extra loss and/or reduced profits you are exposing yourself to in every single other trade by setting a wider SL. Oddly, in every single scenario where the wider stop did save the trade, it ended up going all the way to the -161.8% profit level. Still, not nearly worth it.
As I've said many times now, I'm really not qualified to be doing an analysis like this. This section in particular. Looking at shared currency among the pairs traded, 74 of the trades are correlated. Quite a large group, but it makes sense considering the sort of moves we're looking for with this system. This means you are opening yourself up to more risk if you were to trade on every signal since you are technically trading with the same underlying sentiment on each different pair. For example, GBP/USD and AUD/USD moving together almost certainly means it's due to USD moving both pairs, rather than GBP and AUD both moving the same size and direction coincidentally at the same time. So if you were to trade both signals, you would very likely win or lose both trades - meaning you are actually risking double what you'd normally risk(unless you halve both positions which can be a good option, and is discussed in ParallaxFX's posts and in various other places that go over pair correlation. I won't go into detail about those strategies here). Interestingly though, 17 of those apparently correlated trades ended up with different wins/losses. Also, looking only at trades that were correlated, winrate is 83%/70%/55% (for the three TP levels). Does this give some indication that the same signal on multiple pairs means the signal is stronger? That there's some strong underlying sentiment driving it? Or is it just a matter of too small a sample size? The winrate isn't really much higher than the overall winrates, so that makes me doubt it is statistically significant. One more funny tidbit: EUCAD netted the lowest overall winrate: 30% to even the -61.8% TP level on 10 trades. Seems like that is just a coincidence and not enough data, but dang that's a sucky losing streak. EDIT: WOW I spent some time removing correlated trades manually and it changed the results quite a bit. Some thoughts on this below the results. These numbers also include the other "What I will trade" filters. I added a new worksheet to my data to show what I ended up picking.
Total Trades: 75
TP at -61.8%: 84.00%
TP at -100%: 73.33%
TP at -161.8%: 60.00%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 53.33%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 53.33% (yes, oddly the exact same winrate. but different trades/profits)
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account):
TP at -61.8%: 18.13%
TP at -100%: 26.20%
TP at -161.8%: 34.01%
Moving SL up to 0% when the price hits -61.8%, TP at -100%: 19.20%
Taking half position off at -61.8%, moving SL up to 0%, TP remaining half at -100%: 17.29%
To do this, I removed correlated trades - typically by choosing those whose spread had a lower % of the trade width since that's objective and something I can see ahead of time. Obviously I'd like to only keep the winning trades, but I won't know that during the trade. This did reduce the overall sample size down to a level that I wouldn't otherwise consider to be big enough, but since the results are generally consistent with the overall dataset, I'm not going to worry about it too much. I may also use more discretionary methods(support/resistance, quality of indecision/confirmation candles, news/sentiment for the pairs involved, etc) to filter out correlated trades in the future. But as I've said before I'm going for a pretty mechanical system. This brought the 3 TP levels and even the breakeven strategies much closer together in overall profit. It muted the profit from the high R:R strategies and boosted the profit from the low R:R strategies. This tells me pair correlation was skewing my data quite a bit, so I'm glad I dug in a little deeper. Fortunately my original conclusion to use the -161.8 TP level with static stops is still the winner by a good bit, so it doesn't end up changing my actions. There were a few times where MANY (6-8) correlated pairs all came up at the same time, so it'd be a crapshoot to an extent. And the data showed this - often then won/lost together, but sometimes they did not. As an arbitrary rule, the more correlations, the more trades I did end up taking(and thus risking). For example if there were 3-5 correlations, I might take the 2 "best" trades given my criteria above. 5+ setups and I might take the best 3 trades, even if the pairs are somewhat correlated. I have no true data to back this up, but to illustrate using one example: if AUD/JPY, AUD/USD, CAD/JPY, USD/CAD all set up at the same time (as they did, along with a few other pairs on 6/19/20 9:00 AM), can you really say that those are all the same underlying movement? There are correlations between the different correlations, and trying to filter for that seems rough. Although maybe this is a known thing, I'm still pretty green to Forex - someone please enlighten me if so! I might have to look into this more statistically, but it would be pretty complex to analyze quantitatively, so for now I'm going with my gut and just taking a few of the "best" trades out of the handful. Overall, I'm really glad I went further on this. The boosting of the B/E strategies makes me trust my calculations on those more since they aren't so far from the passive management like they were with the raw data, and that really had me wondering what I did wrong.
What I will trade
Putting all this together, I am going to attempt to trade the following(demo for a bit to make sure I have the hang of it, then for keeps):
"System Details" I described above.
TP at -161.8%
Static SL at opposite side of confirmation candle - I won't move stops up to breakeven.
Trade only 7am-11am and 4pm-11pm signals.
Nothing where spread is more than 25% of trade width.
Looking at the data for these rules, test results are:
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
I'll be sure to let everyone know how it goes!
Other Technical Details
ATR is only slightly elevated in this date range from historical levels, so this should fairly closely represent reality even after the COVID volatility leaves the scalpers sad and alone.
The sample size is much too small for anything really meaningful when you slice by hour or pair. I wasn't particularly looking to test a specific pair here - just the system overall as if you were going to trade it on all pairs with a reasonable spread.
Here's the spreadsheet for anyone that'd like it. (EDIT: Updated some of the setups from the last few days that have fully played out now. I also noticed a few typos, but nothing major that would change the overall outcomes. Regardless, I am currently reviewing every trade to ensure they are accurate.UPDATE: Finally all done. Very few corrections, no change to results.) I have some explanatory notes below to help everyone else understand the spiraled labyrinth of a mind that put the spreadsheet together.
I'm on the East Coast in the US, so the timestamps are Eastern time.
Time stamp is from the confirmation candle, not the indecision candle. So 7am would mean the indecision candle was 6:00-6:59 and the confirmation candle is 7:00-7:59 and you'd put in your order at 8:00.
I found a couple AM/PM typos as I was reviewing the data, so let me know if a trade doesn't make sense and I'll correct it.
Insanely detailed spreadsheet notes
For you real nerds out there. Here's an explanation of what each column means:
Pair - duh
Date/Time - Eastern time, confirmation candle as stated above
Win to -61.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -61.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -100%? - whether the trade made it to the -100% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Win to -161.8%? - whether the trade made it to the -161.8% TP level before it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -61.8% and -100% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -61.8%, but before hitting -100%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -61.8% to -100%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Retracement level between -100% and -161.8% - how deep the price retraced after hitting -100%, but before hitting -161.8%. Be careful to look for the negative signs, it's easy to mix them up. Using the fib% levels defined in ParallaxFX's original thread. A plain hyphen "-" means it did not retrace, but rather went straight through -100% to -161.8%. Positive 100 means it hit the original SL.
Trade Width(Pips) - the size of the confirmation candle, and thus the "width" of your trade on which to determine position size, draw fib levels, etc.
Loser saved by 2 candle stop? - for all losing trades, whether or not the 2-candle stop loss would have saved the trade and how far it ended up getting if so. "No" means it didn't save it, N/A means it wasn't a losing trade so it's not relevant.
Spread(ThinkorSwim) - these are typical spreads for these pairs on ToS.
Spread % of Width - How big is the spread compared to the trade width? Not used in any calculations, but interesting nonetheless.
True Risk(Trade Width + Spread) - I set my SL at the opposite side of the confirmation candle knowing that I'm actually exposing myself to slightly more risk because of the spread(stop order = market order when submitted, so you pay the spread). So this tells you how many pips you are actually risking despite the Trade Width. I prefer this over setting the stop inside from the edge of the candle because some pairs have a wide spread that would mess with the system overall. But also many, many of these trades retraced very nearly to the edge of the confirmation candle, before ending up nicely profitable. If you keep your risk per trade at 1%, you're talking a true risk of, at most, 1.25% (in worst-case scenarios with the spread being 25% of the trade width as I am going with above).
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -61.8% - not going to go into huge detail, see the spreadsheet for calculations if you want. But, in a nutshell, if the trade was a win to 61.8%, it returns a positive # based on 61.8% of the trade width, minus the spread. Otherwise, it returns the True Risk as a negative. Both normalized to the 1% risk you started with.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100% - same as the last, but 100% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -161.8% - same as the last, but 161.8% of Trade Width.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread TP -100%, and move SL to breakeven at 61.8% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then full TP at 100%.
Win or Loss in %(1% risk) including spread take off half of position at -61.8%, move SL to breakeven, TP 100% - uses the retracement level columns to calculate profit/loss the same as the last few columns, but assuming you took of half the position and moved SL to 0% fib level after price hit -61.8%. Then TP the remaining half at 100%.
Overall Growth(-161.8% TP, 1% Risk) - pretty straightforward. Assuming you risked 1% on each trade, what the overall growth level would be chronologically(spreadsheet is sorted by date).
Based on the reasonable rules I discovered in this backtest:
Date range: 6/11-7/3
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 47.43%
Demo Trading Results
Since this post, I started demo trading this system assuming a 5k capital base and risking ~1% per trade. I've added the details to my spreadsheet for anyone interested. The results are pretty similar to the backtest when you consider real-life conditions/timing are a bit different. I missed some trades due to life(work, out of the house, etc), so that brought my total # of trades and thus overall profit down, but the winrate is nearly identical. I also closed a few trades early due to various reasons(not liking the price action, seeing support/resistance emerge, etc). A quick note is that TD's paper trade system fills at the mid price for both stop and limit orders, so I had to subtract the spread from the raw trade values to get the true profit/loss amount for each trade. I'm heading out of town next week, then after that it'll be time to take this sucker live!
Date range: 7/9-7/30
Adjusted Proft % (takes spread into account): 20.73%
Starting Balance: $5,000
Ending Balance: $6,036.51
Live Trading Results
I started live-trading this system on 8/10, and almost immediately had a string of losses much longer than either my backtest or demo period. Murphy's law huh? Anyways, that has me spooked so I'm doing a longer backtest before I start risking more real money. It's going to take me a little while due to the volume of trades, but I'll likely make a new post once I feel comfortable with that and start live trading again.
[META] Recent scam/spam trends.. Or, a peak inside what it's like to moderate /r/forex
After a few...especially trying...interactions with unhappy ban recipients today, I thought it would be fun to share a little info on what moderators do to keep this place clean. :) The forex industry is full of shady characters. Any industry sitting on the intersection of financial independence, work, and money, is bound to attract them. There are many reasons for this; the lower barrier to entry compared to other markets, the lack of public knowledge on the subject, and greedy human nature to name a few. Moderating a subreddit dedicated to forex (or anything trading realted for that matter,) presents extra challenges beyond your regular sub. Marketers and scammers are super motivated, and MLM / referral marketing is extremely popular right now, which can turn everyday regular users into sources of spam. How we currently tackle this problem involves technology (scripts, bots, and automod,) a mod review workflow, and some smart sleuthing when needed. The mod team and our scripts aren't perfect though... but the few false positives we get are a very, very small fraction of all mod actions taken (~1%.) Unfortunately, that means some otherwise sincere members get handled roughly, and that can really suck.. I wish there was a better way, but the alternative is this place becomes a wild west and starts looking like your gmail spam folder. That said, here's my personal stats for JUST the last 24 hours:
Bans: 14[edit:16 nowbefore day's end, two more responding to a 'where can I learn how to trade' post.]
All mod actions (including bans, post and comment removal, etc..): 63
Ban appeals: 2
And I'm just one of the mods. . . So what scammer and marketing trends are we seeing lately?
Content marketing - Infographics with instagram handles watermarked in them, or a blog-like post with a embedded links to their own site.
Personal/direct selling - trying to move the conversation out of public view, usually by taking things to DM, or promoting a 3rd party chatroom where the rules here no longer apply.
Shills - Fake accounts used to boost the credit of another user, or service. It's no coincidence that a user asking about 'ULRA PRO SIGNALZ' will quickly have 5+ replies by low karma, new users, saying how great the service is. [edit:here's an example I just caught..]
Fake P/L Porn - We see this quite often. It's easy to fake MT4 account statements and MT4 Mobile screenshots, and new users can't tell the difference so these posts will get a lot of undeserved attention. When people ask how OP made such mad cash, a sales pitch is usually coming right up.
Honestly, it can be really frustrating at times.. luckily the scripts we have in place make weeding out ~80% of these jokers quite easy and quick. Heck, we had one scammer who blew through 12+ accounts over the last few days trying to scam people but none of their posts ever saw the light of day thanks to the spam triggers I've written. What motivates the mod team to keep this place clean? That's an easy answer: The majority of users here are new to trading. Making sure they aren't food for the wolves is important. But even with all the measures we take, some bad actors still get through. So here's where you can help: Use the report button! Anytime you see something that you think fits the descriptions listed above, or violates our sidebar rules, just report it. Even if you're not 100% sure, don't be afraid to use the report tool.. The worst thing that can happen is the mod team reviews and approves it, but the best outcome is you directly help keep this place clean and humming! :) And the mod team is always looking to improve where it can: I've already talked about what we do to scrub away bad actors, but one place we could do better is education. The plan is to rewrite a good portion of the wiki to include the following sections:
Spotting scams and scammers
How to properly compare brokers and regulatory bodies
The real reason why your old high school friend wants you to sign up to IML, and 10 ways to politely tell him to pound sand
No, that hot instagram model won't sleep with you if you buy her online course
Why all signal services are trash and can die in a fire
(Titles above are a work in progress ;P) Are you a good writer and want to help out with this? Think you can write up a killer wiki article on spotting scam artists? Message the mods and let us know! Finally, a reminder, we are still interested in taking on more moderators and will be revisiting that very shortly. If you'd be interested, read through this post and reply accordingly: https://www.reddit.com/Forex/comments/h7ok6k/seeking_more_mods_recruitment_thread/
eToro: impressions, doubts and (ignored) lessons from copy trading
(no promotional content, no affiliate links) Hi, exactly four years ago, I started copying eToro investors / traders that I selected using the broker's built-in search engine (profitable in last two years, already being copied by others), followed by manual filtering, to take into account fluctuations in yearly returns, composition of their portfolios etc. With that, I got a list of 10 people whom I started to copy on a demo account: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1u52f0XHfr-LauIscKcFDYF0yGTTUr6VY/view?usp=sharing In the screenshot you can see that in case of the first two of them the amount invested was $10,000, while for the rest it was just $100. This is because I started copying the first two a couple of weeks earlier; eventually I changed this into $100 the same day I made the screenshot and this is when my calculations start - so this thing is irrelevant, I just cannot travel in time to make another screenshot. What I did after that? Well, within the next six weeks my profits oscillated between -$11 and +$9.50 (the biggest profit was on Nov 9, a day after US presidential elections). I found this "boring" and discontinued experimenting with copy trading. Today I looked back at those ten traders. Here is what I found. Firstly, seven of them are not with eToro anymore; investorNo1, Simple-Stock-Mkt, tradingrelax, 4exPirate, primit, Gallojack, xjurokx. The other three traders are:
toppertrader: not being copied by anyone and for a good reason: his loss this year alone is 61.16%!
Jean-marcLenfant: copied by only 67 people; his loss this year is -1.09% but in general he is quite successful, with yearly profits ranging from 3.57% to 7.32%.
Girem2: he has no copiers, his profit this year is 41.45% but in 2018 he experienced a loss of 83.15%!
My observations and thoughts are as follows:
Seven out of ten traders are not with eToro anymore, which makes me wonder why. I have no proof but my guess is they simply performed poorly, lost their copiers and closed their accounts. This is already alarming but what if they opened another account? Or, even worse, multiple accounts? They could be investing small money and try different risky approaches, hoping that at least one account will turn out profitable in the long turn, attracting potential copiers. (I'm not claiming that those 7 particular traders did this, it's just my general suspicion regarding some of eToro traders)
I'm unable to calculate what would be my profit if I never stopped copying them, because I cannot check at what day and with what profit those seven traders left eToro. I'm guessing this would be an immense loss. On the other hand, considering the three traders who are still with eToro, I would lose more than a quarter of my assets!
What now? I must be a quite adventurous person or at least an incorrigible optimist, because a month ago (exactly on Aug 26th) I started copying three traders with real money. Here is who they are. rubymza (Heloise Greeff)
invests in stocks, with GOOG, INTC, BLDP, MA, MSFT, AMZN, V, MU, IBM and NXPI making up 50.3% of her portfolio (allocation of each of them is in between 3.02% and 6.85%)
active since 2016 (only the year 2016 ended with a loss)
has 3044 copiers and $2M-$5M of copy assets under management
strategy (her own words): "My investing strategy focusses mostly on US indices, tech and pharma, promising future (5-10years) growth. My trades are based on technical analysis using machine learning to understand patterns and trends in the markets. I prefer to keep a diverse portfolio to spread risk while achieving great returns."
he is a Forex trader, making typically 21 trades per week; his favorite currency pairs are EURCHF (12% of trades), CADCHF and GBPUSD; the trades, however, typically make up below 5% of his portfolio (at least whenever I'm checking it), making most of my funds unused
active since January 2017: surprisingly enough, he has every single month profitable, though monthly profits are in the range of 0.03% to 3.34% only
has 8977 copiers and more than $5M of copy assets under management
strategy (his own words): "I monitor currency pairs all day to find the best entry. There is some management/scaling position for perfect entry. The risk control is a big part of my strategy," (quite vague, to be honest)
commodities compose 76% of his portfolio and his favorite assets are Gold and Oil (at the moment, Gold makes up half of invested amount)
active since July 2016, with the following yearly profits, starting from 2016: 6.56%, 10.05%, 13.09%, 32.26% and -2.03% (the current year)
has 1493 copiers and $1M-$2M of copy assets under management
strategy (his own words): "My system is based on patterns, and a variety of technical analysis tools and some fundamental analysis. I primarily trade in commodities. " (quite vague as well)
own experience: my profit with rayvahey is 2.56%
What was my strategy to hand-pick these particular traders? First I did some basic scanning using eToro's built-in search engine. The most important filter was that the trader was profitable within the last two years: unfortunately, eToro does not allow to reach details of earlier performance automatically. To know how the trader performed before 2019, I had to look at stats in the profile of each of them. I was also taking into account how often they trade (to avoid those who do only a couple of trades yearly), whether they were trading recently and whether they write posts regularly in their feed. With this, I got a list of fifteen candidates to copy:
As you already know, I finally chose three of them. Rubymza seemed to be the most trustworthy stock trader, based on profits, posts feed and regular trading, among other things. Regarding OlivierDanvel, his uniqueness is the ability to record continuous profits with the Forex market. Finally, with rayvahey I wanted to increase my exposure to the commodities market. Wish me good luck! Michael P.S. You might find those copy-trading related readings interesting:
No, the British did not steal $45 trillion from India
This is an updated copy of the version on BadHistory. I plan to update it in accordance with the feedback I got. I'd like to thank two people who will remain anonymous for helping me greatly with this post (you know who you are) Three years ago a festschrift for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri was published by Shubhra Chakrabarti, a history teacher at the University of Delhi and Utsa Patnaik, a Marxist economist who taught at JNU until 2010. One of the essays in the festschirt by Utsa Patnaik was an attempt to quantify the "drain" undergone by India during British Rule. Her conclusion? Britain robbed India of $45 trillion (or £9.2 trillion) during their 200 or so years of rule. This figure was immensely popular, and got republished in several major news outlets (here, here, here, here (they get the number wrong) and more recently here), got a mention from the Minister of External Affairs & returns 29,100 results on Google. There's also plenty of references to it here on Reddit. Patnaik is not the first to calculate such a figure. Angus Maddison thought it was £100 million, Simon Digby said £1 billion, Javier Estaban said £40 million see Roy (2019). The huge range of figures should set off some alarm bells. So how did Patnaik calculate this (shockingly large) figure? Well, even though I don't have access to the festschrift, she conveniently has written an article detailing her methodology here. Let's have a look.
How exactly did the British manage to diddle us and drain our wealth’ ? was the question that Basudev Chatterjee (later editor of a volume in the Towards Freedom project) had posed to me 50 years ago when we were fellow-students abroad.
This is begging the question.
After decades of research I find that using India’s commodity export surplus as the measure and applying an interest rate of 5%, the total drain from 1765 to 1938, compounded up to 2016, comes to £9.2 trillion; since $4.86 exchanged for £1 those days, this sum equals about $45 trillion.
This is completely meaningless. To understand why it's meaningless consider India's annual coconut exports. These are almost certainly a surplus but the surplus in trade is countered by the other country buying the product (indeed, by definition, trade surpluses contribute to the GDP of a nation which hardly plays into intuitive conceptualisations of drain). Furthermore, Dewey (2019) critiques the 5% interest rate.
She [Patnaik] consistently adopts statistical assumptions (such as compound interest at a rate of 5% per annum over centuries) that exaggerate the magnitude of the drain
The exact mechanism of drain, or transfers from India to Britain was quite simple.
Drain theory possessed the political merit of being easily grasped by a nation of peasants. [...] No other idea could arouse people than the thought that they were being taxed so that others in far off lands might live in comfort. [...] It was, therefore, inevitable that the drain theory became the main staple of nationalist political agitation during the Gandhian era.
The key factor was Britain’s control over our taxation revenues combined with control over India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its booming commodity export surplus with the world. Simply put, Britain used locally raised rupee tax revenues to pay for its net import of goods, a highly abnormal use of budgetary funds not seen in any sovereign country.
The issue with figures like these is they all make certain methodological assumptions that are impossible to prove. From Roy in Frankema et al. (2019):
the "drain theory" of Indian poverty cannot be tested with evidence, for several reasons. First, it rests on the counterfactual that any money saved on account of factor payments abroad would translate into domestic investment, which can never be proved. Second, it rests on "the primitive notion that all payments to foreigners are "drain"", that is, on the assumption that these payments did not contribute to domestic national income to the equivalent extent (Kumar 1985, 384; see also Chaudhuri 1968). Again, this cannot be tested. [...] Fourth, while British officers serving India did receive salaries that were many times that of the average income in India, a paper using cross-country data shows that colonies with better paid officers were governed better (Jones 2013).
Indeed, drain theory rests on some very weak foundations. This, in of itself, should be enough to dismiss any of the other figures that get thrown out. Nonetheless, I felt it would be a useful exercise to continue exploring Patnaik's take on drain theory.
The East India Company from 1765 onwards allocated every year up to one-third of Indian budgetary revenues net of collection costs, to buy a large volume of goods for direct import into Britain, far in excess of that country’s own needs.
So what's going on here? Well Roy (2019) explains it better:
Colonial India ran an export surplus, which, together with foreign investment, was used to pay for services purchased from Britain. These payments included interest on public debt, salaries, and pensions paid to government offcers who had come from Britain, salaries of managers and engineers, guaranteed profts paid to railway companies, and repatriated business profts. How do we know that any of these payments involved paying too much? The answer is we do not.
So what was really happening is the government was paying its workers for services (as well as guaranteeing profits - to promote investment - something the GoI does today Dalal (2019), and promoting business in India), and those workers were remitting some of that money to Britain. This is hardly a drain (unless, of course, Indian diaspora around the world today are "draining" it). In some cases, the remittances would take the form of goods (as described) see Chaudhuri (1983):
It is obvious that these debit items were financed through the export surplus on merchandise account, and later, when railway construction started on a large scale in India, through capital import. Until 1833 the East India Company followed a cumbersome method in remitting the annual home charges. This was to purchase export commodities in India out of revenue, which were then shipped to London and the proceeds from their sale handed over to the home treasury.
While Roy's earlier point argues better paid officers governed better, it is honestly impossible to say what part of the repatriated export surplus was a drain, and what was not. However calling all of it a drain is definitely misguided. It's worth noting that Patnaik seems to make no attempt to quantify the benefits of the Raj either, Dewey (2019)'s 2nd criticism:
she [Patnaik] consistently ignores research that would tend to cut the economic impact of the drain down to size, such as the work on the sources of investment during the industrial revolution (which shows that industrialisation was financed by the ploughed-back profits of industrialists) or the costs of empire school (which stresses the high price of imperial defence)
Since tropical goods were highly prized in other cold temperate countries which could never produce them, in effect these free goods represented international purchasing power for Britain which kept a part for its own use and re-exported the balance to other countries in Europe and North America against import of food grains, iron and other goods in which it was deficient.
Re-exports necessarily adds value to goods when the goods are processed and when the goods are transported. The country with the largest navy at the time would presumably be in very good stead to do the latter.
The British historians Phyllis Deane and WA Cole presented an incorrect estimate of Britain’s 18th-19th century trade volume, by leaving out re-exports completely. I found that by 1800 Britain’s total trade was 62% higher than their estimate, on applying the correct definition of trade including re-exports, that is used by the United Nations and by all other international organisations.
While interesting, and certainly expected for such an old book, re-exporting necessarily adds value to goods.
When the Crown took over from the Company, from 1861 a clever system was developed under which all of India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its fast-rising commodity export surplus with the world, was intercepted and appropriated by Britain. As before up to a third of India’s rising budgetary revenues was not spent domestically but was set aside as ‘expenditure abroad’.
So, what does this mean? Britain appropriated all of India's earnings, and then spent a third of it aboard? Not exactly. She is describing home charges see Roy (2019) again:
Some of the expenditures on defense and administration were made in sterling and went out of the country. This payment by the government was known as the Home Charges. For example, interest payment on loans raised to finance construction of railways and irrigation works, pensions paid to retired officers, and purchase of stores, were payments in sterling. [...] almost all money that the government paid abroad corresponded to the purchase of a service from abroad. [...] The balance of payments system that emerged after 1800 was based on standard business principles.India bought something and paid for it.State revenues were used to pay for wages of people hired abroad, pay for interest on loans raised abroad, and repatriation of profits on foreign investments coming into India. These were legitimate market transactions.
Indeed, if paying for what you buy is drain, then several billions of us are drained every day.
The Secretary of State for India in Council, based in London, invited foreign importers to deposit with him the payment (in gold, sterling and their own currencies) for their net imports from India, and these gold and forex payments disappeared into the yawning maw of the SoS’s account in the Bank of England.
It should be noted that India having two heads was beneficial, and encouraged investment per Roy (2019):
The fact that the India Office in London managed a part of the monetary system made India creditworthy, stabilized its currency, and encouraged foreign savers to put money into railways and private enterprise in India. Current research on the history of public debt shows that stable and large colonies found it easier to borrow abroad than independent economies because the investors trusted the guarantee of the colonist powers.
Against India’s net foreign earnings he issued bills, termed Council bills (CBs), to an equivalent rupee value. The rate (between gold-linked sterling and silver rupee) at which the bills were issued, was carefully adjusted to the last farthing, so that foreigners would never find it more profitable to ship financial gold as payment directly to Indians, compared to using the CB route. Foreign importers then sent the CBs by post or by telegraph to the export houses in India, that via the exchange banks were paid out of the budgeted provision of sums under ‘expenditure abroad’, and the exporters in turn paid the producers (peasants and artisans) from whom they sourced the goods.
Sunderland (2013) argues CBs had two main roles (and neither were part of a grand plot to keep gold out of India):
Council bills had two roles. They firstly promoted trade by handing the IO some control of the rate of exchange and allowing the exchange banks to remit funds to India and to hedge currency transaction risks. They also enabled the Indian government to transfer cash to England for the payment of its UK commitments.
The United Nations (1962) historical data for 1900 to 1960, show that for three decades up to 1928 (and very likely earlier too) India posted the second highest merchandise export surplus in the world, with USA in the first position. Not only were Indians deprived of every bit of the enormous international purchasing power they had earned over 175 years, even its rupee equivalent was not issued to them since not even the colonial government was credited with any part of India’s net gold and forex earnings against which it could issue rupees. The sleight-of-hand employed, namely ‘paying’ producers out of their own taxes, made India’s export surplus unrequited and constituted a tax-financed drain to the metropolis, as had been correctly pointed out by those highly insightful classical writers, Dadabhai Naoroji and RCDutt.
It doesn't appear that others appreciate their insight Roy (2019):
K. N. Chaudhuri rightly calls such practice ‘confused’ economics ‘coloured by political feelings’.
Surplus budgets to effect such heavy tax-financed transfers had a severe employment–reducing and income-deflating effect: mass consumption was squeezed in order to release export goods. Per capita annual foodgrains absorption in British India declined from 210 kg. during the period 1904-09, to 157 kg. during 1937-41, and to only 137 kg by 1946.
If even a part of its enormous foreign earnings had been credited to it and not entirely siphoned off, India could have imported modern technology to build up an industrial structure as Japan was doing.
This is, unfortunately, impossible to prove. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication that India would've united (this is arguably more plausible than the given counterfactual1). Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been nuked in WW2, much like Japan. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been invaded by lizard people, much like Japan. The list continues eternally. Nevertheless, I will charitably examine the given counterfactual anyway. Did pre-colonial India have industrial potential? The answer is a resounding no. From Gupta (1980):
This article starts from the premise that while economic categories - the extent of commodity production, wage labour, monetarisation of the economy, etc - should be the basis for any analysis of the production relations of pre-British India, it is the nature of class struggles arising out of particular class alignments that finally gives the decisive twist to social change. Arguing on this premise, and analysing the available evidence, this article concludes that there was little potential for industrial revolution before the British arrived in India because, whatever might have been the character of economic categories of that period,the class relations had not sufficiently matured to develop productive forces and the required class struggle for a 'revolution' to take place.
Yet all of this did not amount to an economic situation comparable to that of western Europe on the eve of the industrial revolution. Her technology - in agriculture as well as manufacturers - had by and large been stagnant for centuries. [...] The weakness of the Indian economy in the mid-eighteenth century, as compared to pre-industrial Europe was not simply a matter of technology and commercial and industrial organization. No scientific or geographical revolution formed part of the eighteenth-century Indian's historical experience. [...] Spontaneous movement towards industrialisation is unlikely in such a situation.
So now we've established India did not have industrial potential, was India similar to Japan just before the Meiji era? The answer, yet again, unsurprisingly, is no. Japan's economic situation was not comparable to India's, which allowed for Japan to finance its revolution. From Yasuba (1986):
All in all, the Japanese standard of living may not have been much below the English standard of living before industrialization, and both of them may have been considerably higher than the Indian standard of living. We can no longer say that Japan started from a pathetically low economic level and achieved a rapid or even "miraculous" economic growth. Japan's per capita income was almost as high as in Western Europe before industrialization, and it was possible for Japan to produce surplus in the Meiji Period to finance private and public capital formation.
The circumstances that led to Meiji Japan were extremely unique. See Tomlinson (1985):
Most modern comparisons between India and Japan, written by either Indianists or Japanese specialists, stress instead that industrial growth in Meiji Japan was the product of unique features that were not reproducible elsewhere. [...] it is undoubtably true that Japan's progress to industrialization has been unique and unrepeatable
So there you have it. Unsubstantiated statistical assumptions, calling any number you can a drain & assuming a counterfactual for no good reason gets you this $45 trillion number. Hopefully that's enough to bury it in the ground. 1. Several authors have affirmed that Indian identity is a colonial artefact. For example seeRajan 1969:
Perhaps the single greatest and most enduring impact of British rule over India is that it created an Indian nation, in the modern political sense. After centuries of rule by different dynasties overparts of the Indian sub-continent, and after about 100 years of British rule, Indians ceased to be merely Bengalis, Maharashtrians,or Tamils, linguistically and culturally.
But then, it would be anachronistic to condemn eighteenth-century Indians, who served the British, as collaborators, when the notion of 'democratic' nationalism or of an Indian 'nation' did not then exist.[...]Indians who fought for them, differed from the Europeans in having a primary attachment to a non-belligerent religion, family and local chief, which was stronger than any identity they might have with a more remote prince or 'nation'.
Chakrabarti, Shubra & Patnaik, Utsa (2018). Agrarian and other histories: Essays for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri. Colombia University Press Hickel, Jason (2018). How the British stole $45 trillion from India. The Guardian Bhuyan, Aroonim & Sharma, Krishan (2019). The Great Loot: How the British stole $45 trillion from India. Indiapost Monbiot, George (2020). English Landowners have stolen our rights. It is time to reclaim them. The Guardian Tsjeng, Zing (2020). How Britain Stole $45 trillion from India with trains | Empires of Dirt. Vice Chaudhury, Dipanjan (2019). British looted $45 trillion from India in today’s value: Jaishankar. The Economic Times Roy, Tirthankar (2019). How British rule changed India's economy: The Paradox of the Raj. Palgrave Macmillan Patnaik, Utsa (2018). How the British impoverished India. Hindustan Times Tuovila, Alicia (2019). Expenditure method. Investopedia Dewey, Clive (2019). Changing the guard: The dissolution of the nationalist–Marxist orthodoxy in the agrarian and agricultural history of India. The Indian Economic & Social History Review Chandra, Bipan et al. (1989). India's Struggle for Independence, 1857-1947. Penguin Books Frankema, Ewout & Booth, Anne (2019). Fiscal Capacity and the Colonial State in Asia and Africa, c. 1850-1960. Cambridge University Press Dalal, Sucheta (2019). IL&FS Controversy: Centre is Paying Up on Sovereign Guarantees to ADB, KfW for Group's Loan. TheWire Chaudhuri, K.N. (1983). X - Foreign Trade and Balance of Payments (1757–1947). Cambridge University Press Sunderland, David (2013). Financing the Raj: The City of London and Colonial India, 1858-1940. Boydell Press Dewey, Clive (1978). Patwari and Chaukidar: Subordinate officials and the reliability of India’s agricultural statistics. Athlone Press Smith, Lisa (2015). The great Indian calorie debate: Explaining rising undernourishment during India’s rapid economic growth. Food Policy Duh, Josephine & Spears, Dean (2016). Health and Hunger: Disease, Energy Needs, and the Indian Calorie Consumption Puzzle. The Economic Journal Vankatesh, P. et al. (2016). Relationship between Food Production and Consumption Diversity in India – Empirical Evidences from Cross Section Analysis. Agricultural Economics Research Review Gupta, Shaibal (1980). Potential of Industrial Revolution in Pre-British India. Economic and Political Weekly Raychaudhuri, Tapan (1983). I - The mid-eighteenth-century background. Cambridge University Press Yasuba, Yasukichi (1986). Standard of Living in Japan Before Industrialization: From what Level did Japan Begin? A Comment. The Journal of Economic History Tomblinson, B.R. (1985). Writing History Sideways: Lessons for Indian Economic Historians from Meiji Japan. Cambridge University Press Rajan, M.S. (1969). The Impact of British Rule in India. Journal of Contemporary History Bryant, G.J. (2000). Indigenous Mercenaries in the Service of European Imperialists: The Case of the Sepoys in the Early British Indian Army, 1750-1800. War in History
With new forex brokers coming online every day, it often requires a lot of research and patience to choose the best forex broker for you. We have identified some of the key things that every trader needs to assess when selecting a broker to save you time and help beginner traders, and we have compiled a list of the best Forex brokers on the market. The Bottom Line: The brokers below represent the best brokers for beginners. Pro Tip: Most of these brokers provide free demo accounts so that you can use virtual money to test the brokers and their platforms. Before using your own cash, give it a try with some game money. Here is a summary of the best novice brokers. Note: Not all Forex brokers accept US clients. For your convenience we specified those that accept US Forex traders as clients.
Universal Bypass will now change its extension tab titles to reflect how many seconds are left on internal timers, i.e. if you've set "Take me to destinations after 5 seconds." the "You're almost at your destination." page will be called "(5) You're almost at your destination." and count down with the timer on the page.
Improved the way the version number is shown in the options to make it more apparent that bypass definitions are separate from the extension version
Fixed "Instantly take me to destinations of trackers" not working in Chromium-based browsers
Fixed cases of Universal Bypass being detected and improved the Linkvertise preflight bypass to allow for auto-updating of anti-detection rules
Added bypasses for: 4shared.com (download without login), cloudgallery.net, curimovie.com
Universal Bypass' built-in updating system for the injection script now also includes rules for preflight bypasses. Collectively, this is now called "bypass definitions."
Fixed "Close tab containing the crowd-sourced destination after x seconds of visiting it" still not always working on Firefox, and this solution doesn't even need the "Access browser tabs" permission anymore.
Changed default values of options with seconds and removed hint that "0" means instant because I think that's obvious.
Fixed "Close tab containing the crowd-sourced destination after x seconds of visiting it" not working on Firefox by adding the "Access browser tabs" permission. On Chromium-based browsers, this permission isn't needed, and Universal Bypass on Firefox doesn't do anything else with it.
Fixed instant navigation causing Google's "clever" code to break some bypasses
Added a timer to the "You're almost at your destination" page if the destination would detect Universal Bypass if you would navigate too quickly.
Improved shon.xyz bypass
Added filesupload.org bypass
Improved katmoviehd.nl bypass
Removed the option to disable the info box. The info box was added to prevent getting reports for websites which are bypassed by crowd bypass, but we still do. I believe people disable the option — maybe because "Show informational messages on some sites" sounds scary, maybe because they never encountered one — and then when they encounter a crowd-bypassed site, they have no indication of that, and report it. As always, I'd like to get some feedback on this, especially from other perspectives.
Custom bypass developers: You can now use "safelyAssign(...)" instead of "location.href = ..." or "location.assign(...)" which will assert that the URL is good before actually assigning, returns false if not. Note that you should only use this for instant redirects, for everything else "safelyNavigate(...)" is still recommended.
Added majidzhacker.com bypass to replace tinyurl.majidzhacker.com bypass
Improved the look of highlighted options in dark mode
Replaced "Automatically open crowd-sourced destinations in a new tab" option with "Open crowd-sourced destinations in a new tab after x second(s)" so it is in line with the new "Take me to destinations after x seconds" option added in 11.0. Again, I'd like to hear your feedback on these new, rather drastic changes.
Fixed firstrun page being opened in a new window on Firefox
Restyled options slightly to better fit custom bypasses
Some general code improvements
11.0 — The Timed Update
Replaced "Instantly take me to destinations" option with "Take me to destinations after x seconds" option which can be used to get the same effects as with the old option with the added feature of having a timer to automatically take you to the destination which I'm personally not a super fan of but I see the request from time to time and this seemed to be the best solution. I'd definitely like to hear your feedback on this.
This 360-degree review of every US Forex broker gives us a complete understanding of whether they should sit on our list of Forex brokers accepting US clients. Back to top ⬆ FAQs. What is the best Forex broker in the USA? The best overall US Forex broker in our analysis is IG. The next strongest contender is Forex.com. If you want to trade in innovative ways using binary options and similar ... US Forex brokers must be regulated by the National Futures Association (NFA) or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and must meet strict requirements designed to protect local investors. Needless to say, the CFTC and NFA are quite strict in enforcing their regulations and guidelines. If a regulated company fails co comply with any of the legal requirements, the fines are pretty heavy. Forex.com provides negative balance protection for clients belonging to GAIN Capital UK Ltd for forex spot and CFD trading, but only for retail clients from the European Union. Professional and non-EU clients are not covered with any negative balance protection. Background. Forex.com is a brand of GAIN Capital, a US-based investment company. Strict criteria for the Forex Broker Review. In contrast to many other comparison sites, we present you on this website only the safest providers with the best conditions for traders. As experts with many years of experience, we have tested many Forex Brokers and still use some of them. A good provider should have certain characteristics that guarantee good and safe investing. It is not ... 1 review. JM. They are the worst brokers. They are the worst brokers. One of their representative contacted me today and he was very adamant at me for some reason.It was very digusting and displeasing.I would not recommend them as a broker ever Useful. Share. Reply. You've already flagged this John Flycat 1 review. RU. I have tested them too well. I have tested them too well. :( I am a ... opened an account because they are US regulated and so few forex brokers are. Wanted to fund my acct via bank transfer but instead of having the option of adding my bank acct number and routing number, I have to choose my bank from a list of banks on their site. My bank is not listed. I tried contacting them via their chat service, only received automated messages back (the messages received ... USA Forex Signal Review. It’s clear right from the beginning, that the USA Forex Signal website is outdated and needing major improvements.This doesn’t mean that the signals are going to be losers, but it does mean that the developers don’t have a great judgments and When it comes to their appearance in the marketplace. When it comes to US forex brokers, Forex.com has to be an immediate consideration for opening your forex trading account in the USA. They are CFTC licensed and NFA regulated (#0339826) and provide a selection of flexible and accessible account types with low spreads starting from 0.2 pips, including their Direct Market Access account.This offers some of the most unbeatable spreads among any of ... The ForexBrokers.com annual forex broker review (four years running) is the most cited in the industry. With over 50,000 words of research across the site, we spend hundreds of hours testing forex brokers each year. How we test. Trading forex (currencies) in the United States (US) is popular among fx traders. Before any fx broker can accept US forex traders as clients, they must become ... USA Forex Signal wie der Name schon sagt soll Händler aus den Vereinigten Staaten sein Targeting. aber, Bei der Überprüfung der USAForexSignal, entdeckten wir, dass dies eine falsche Bezeichnung ist. Die USA Forex Signal erklärte zwar, dass ihr Dienst in bis zu Verfügung 400 Länder weltweit. Wir möchten die Tatsache der Verkäufer viele Routen zur Verfügung gestellt Trading-Signale zu ...
The 4 BEST Forex Brokers & Why I Recommend Them - YouTube
Looking for Forex Brokers US based? Here's 3 to check out. Discover how to trade Forex & earn while you learn, go here to find out how http://tradewithed.com... 📚 FREE Education Telegram Channel: https://bit.ly/2IPrHbV 75% OFF VIP Lifetime Access: http://www.ak9fx.com/vip-sale-march-2020 Book A Call With Me: https://... Do you want to learn about Forex and Price Action Trading? If so, you have come to the right place. Channel topics include how to trade Price Action, Forex O... IG is an international retail foreign exchange broker based in London that also offers accounts in the United States. The platform allows you to buy and sell... This video took a while to make. I did A LOT of research, I know a lot of people TRUST my recommendations so before I recommended any of these brokers. I eit... These are our top 3 forex Brokers! Insanely I forgot to mention who ranks best for spreads & currently Blueberry Markets seems to be giving you the best bang...