open a SECTION individully for investors in need to find good FX manager Omówić

i think maybe it can realize this website, traders, and invetors all-win. sorry for my poor english.

Hi donnie, it's a nice idea - could you please give more details as to what should be in the section?

Thanks.

It's simple. traders basically believe your website, investor basically believe your website. so in this section, your site act a bridge-connecting role. if you bridge would help willing traders find matched investor and vice versa, this section is a bulletin.
Then your website attract more and more excellent FX traders and investors and the same time your site value will get great promoted. Just a suggestion.

I think this is a very good idea.

In terms of a section for managers, I think you'd need to have a list of elegibility requirements before a manager can apply to be listed in this section - off the top of my head:

- minimum amount of time the account has been trading for - I would suggest a minimum of 3 months.

- need to disclose the broker you are using, so a potential investor can assess the spreads/reputation of the broker etc

- minimum amount the account needs to be funded with - I would suggest a minimum of at least $500. If a potential manager is opening an account with $10 at a bucket shop, hoping to attract investors, it hardly instills confidence.

- a much higher level of disclosure - none of this locking access to open trades. If a potential manager is holding a position with a huge unrealised loss, I want to know about it. At the moment, this skews the stats and makes it highly confusing to assess and compare systems.

- beefing up the reporting stats requirements - if a system isn't updated for a certain time, for me thats an alarm bell - I would suggest that the account be removed from view until it is.

At the moment, there are a number of ways MFB can be manipulated, especially by unscrupulous 'traders' who actively seek funds to invest. For example, I can set up 8 real trading acounts, each with a bucket shop broker which offers $10 accounts and 500:1 leverage. I take massively leveraged long positions on 4 accounts, and short positions on the other 4. The 4 accounts which are not blown up, I then repeat the process - 2 longs, 2 shorts. Then again for the remaining 2 accounts. At the end of the day, for just $80, I have an account which has great looking stats, 3 winning trades, 100% win rate, and a huge account gain %age. Some of the above suggestions will at least make it harder for these sorts of managers to slip through the net.

You might also want to think about charging a nominal fee for a manager to list his account, thus attracting only serious managers.

Here already have many traders infomation and performance , so investors' introduction maybe needed at first. I like your site arrangement, so i think this site has a very good development.

FXAndy posted:
    I think this is a very good idea.

In terms of a section for managers, I think you'd need to have a list of elegibility requirements before a manager can apply to be listed in this section - off the top of my head:

- minimum amount of time the account has been trading for - I would suggest a minimum of 3 months.

- need to disclose the broker you are using, so a potential investor can assess the spreads/reputation of the broker etc

- minimum amount the account needs to be funded with - I would suggest a minimum of at least $500. If a potential manager is opening an account with $10 at a bucket shop, hoping to attract investors, it hardly instills confidence.

- a much higher level of disclosure - none of this locking access to open trades. If a potential manager is holding a position with a huge unrealised loss, I want to know about it. At the moment, this skews the stats and makes it highly confusing to assess and compare systems.

- beefing up the reporting stats requirements - if a system isn't updated for a certain time, for me thats an alarm bell - I would suggest that the account be removed from view until it is.

At the moment, there are a number of ways MFB can be manipulated, especially by unscrupulous 'traders' who actively seek funds to invest. For example, I can set up 8 real trading acounts, each with a bucket shop broker which offers $10 accounts and 500:1 leverage. I take massively leveraged long positions on 4 accounts, and short positions on the other 4. The 4 accounts which are not blown up, I then repeat the process - 2 longs, 2 shorts. Then again for the remaining 2 accounts. At the end of the day, for just $80, I have an account which has great looking stats, 3 winning trades, 100% win rate, and a huge account gain %age. Some of the above suggestions will at least make it harder for these sorts of managers to slip through the net.

You might also want to think about charging a nominal fee for a manager to list his account, thus attracting only serious managers.

very good , Andy

100% agreed.


Requirements to be Displayed on Money Manager Section:

1.) No hidden Equity
2.) No hidden Account balance, deposit, withdraw,
3. No hidden Broker- We also need to filter out the Bucket shops.. So any broker that is NOT older than 2 years.
3.) Trading history can be private- Because the Analytical Statistics already displays the W/L , Pip gain, Trading activity Etc
 However, we will need to fix the Drawdown calculations so we can have access to how many Pips did the trade go against the Money manager, before the trade was closed, whether at a Loss/Gain.
  Well Maybe we should get POLL VOTE on Trading History... because as an investor, we need to know the accuracy of our Money Manager...

Any more suggestions??

''Stevetrade'' made a great point about Double verification on another Suggestion box....

In order for a External Money manager to be displayed. their system needs to be linked to another source, like a signal provider to confirm that these gains can be achieved on another broker. Tradency, C2, zipsignals are creditable.

Also, I understand that some External Money managers will not allow to offer their Signals to the public for a mere $100 monthly fee.

Solution: that Money manager can easily Charge a rate fee of $999 a month to ensure that If investors want to use that particular money manager, they will use them instead of the signals...

But the double verification is 100% needed.
 

I actually think that only full disclosure on MyFxBook should allow entry into the money manager side of things.

I have a suggestion for this actually, rather than have a separate section, simply allow systems to be marked as 'for commercial purposes'. Then add a filter into the systems selection.

Marking your system as 'for commercial purposes' basically restricts your ability to mark anything on the system as private.

stevetrade posted:
    I have a suggestion for this actually, rather than have a separate section, simply allow systems to be marked as 'for commercial purposes'. Then add a filter into the systems selection.

Marking your system as 'for commercial purposes' basically restricts your ability to mark anything on the system as private.

That is Perfect... Way to go Steve! After reading the comments on https://www.myfxbook.com/members/robw135/rwfxm/32230

Its probably best if he Apologized to his investors and stopped offering his service until he is willing to display All the Suggestions above. This goes for anyone that is offering 'Strictly Commercial Venues'

A few more fixes on this site and we will have an honest community with Full Transparency.

Hi Admin,

My suggestion to this topic:

I think it is good to add another 2 sub categories under Reviews section which are FX Managers and individual signal providers.
FX Manager for manager that takes fund from investors. Individual Signal provider section should list individual that offer signaling services to investor.

The structure in these 2 categories should be more or less are same with existing Brokers, EAs, Signal Providors. The main purpose is for members in this website to rate, comments and of course to look for individual signal provider and fund managers.

However, who is qualified to be listed? This is the decision of Admin. I mean the decision of admin to set the requirements. But again, my opinion, the requirements should be high. Because you/all of us do not want scammer or low qualities fund managers/signal providers to be listed. If the requirements are not high enough then you are providing something that same with rentasignal - which is everyone can join then provide signal.
You need to filter up those low quality fund managers/signal providers.


Admin, no offences to you and myfxbook but please do not create another market place for forex investor to meet up with scammer. To avoid this, you really need to filter up and tune the requirements to be listed to become higher. If it is about easy to be listed then meaning it is a market place for investor to meet up scammer.

Someone might say that it is not fair if the requirements are too high to be listed, investors manage to filter themselves, investors manage to spot good/quality fx manager by themselves. In my opinion, it is true only for experience fx investor. What about newbie? Do you think they are able to differentiate between scammer and good fx manager?

For those members that do not meet the requirements to be listed, they still can provide fx management and signaling service through usual way, like what is happening now.

So this site must not only help on bridging trader and investors but must also help those newbie to filter out between high quality and low quality. Then you are meeting the whole objective.


Regards,
SIM

szdonnie posted:
    i think maybe it can realize this website, traders, and invetors all-win. sorry for my poor english.

donnie, my 1st vouch have been placed to you. A good suggestion.

SIM

Hi Admin,

In the 2 sub categories (Fund Managers & Individual Signal Providers), you should have voting categories just like in 'Brokers' etc...
I suggest these categories: Pricing, Easy to follow, Support, Performance, Consistency, risk.

Pricing - the commission for fund manager or signaling fee for signal provider.
Easy to follow - maybe only in signal provider, how easy to follow the signal provided.
Support - customer service
Performance - profit return / ROI
Consistency - How consistent of the return?
Risk - How risky is the service? In term of trading style.


We can have more that above listed.

Regards,
SIM

Hi All,

I would like to add another factor for voting. It is something to describe whether the signal/fx management is worth the money. For example, if a signal is charging USD100 monthly, but it only manage to make 100pips per month, then members can vote for it whether this signal is worth the charges or not. For fx management, if the manager asking for 50/50 but he only manage to make few pips, then this is where to vote for it.

Anyone can think of best adjective for this factor?

Regards,
SIM

100 pips per month with a 10 pip stop loss on each trade is a lovely return. 😄

'Value for money' would be my description of it and it is a good idea I think.