[aceriker]

Originally Posted by meisalas

on a mini-account, 1 lot is worth $50 and i think that's what it means with 50:1... however, u used $50 from ur account, but then 1 pip still costs you $1, so from that, with a $50 plus leverage, you have actually controlled $10,000 of money that's not actually yours, that's the power of leverage. Without the leverage, 1 pip only costs .0001, but with the power of leverage, it costs $1 (1/.0001 = 10,000). (for more experienced and knowledgable traders, please correct me if i am wrong)...

You are almost correct, on a mini-account (usually defined as $2000 or less, but each broker varies) each lot is worth $10,000. Therefore it follows that if 1 standard lot on EUR/USD has a pip value of $10, 1 mini-lot on EUR/USD has a pip value of $1.

So if you bought 10 mini-lots, you would have a trade worth $100,000.

The higher the leverage, the larger amount of lots you can trade with and hence higher the risk.

Many experienced traders never trade with more than 20:1 leverage.

ace

Why not more than 20:1 leverage?

Also, Betting2Win, I have left a PM for you.

And man, this is an amazing lot of info going over my head. Can one of you simplify for me if you dont mind?

Thanks a lot

[meisalas]

So, the 10:1, 100:1 etc etc. does not really affect the pip cost... a mini-account pip cost is $1 and in a standard account, a pip costs $10...
I get confused a lot with this ratio thing... i only know that you control more than what you really own...
Anyways, please correct me here, i hope i'm getting it somehow...
Basically, a mini-account controls 10,000... and a regular account controls 100,000.. the ratio makes more sense with a regular account...
for an x:1 ratio, n is the divisor... 100,000/x = z and z is the cost per lot.
say 100:1 ratio: 100,000/100 = 1,000 therefore per lot costs 1,000
for 20:1 ratio: 100,000/20 = 5,000 (cost per lot)
for 50:1 ratio: 100,000/50 = 2,000 (per lot)
but still a pip still cost $10
what is the relationship of this ratio then with the profit cost if 1 pip always costs $10?
so far, for me it makes sense only with 100:1 but why the other ratio?

(i only have a mini-account, so my mind is still in a small-scale... )

[Klaka]

So,

realistically. In simple terms, in "GAIN/LOSS" terms, not value.

Here's what we are looking at;

1:1, 10:1, 100:1

Mini Account (Example: $100 controls 10,000 units)
gain/loss per pip is $1, but you can choose to trade all 10,000 units, making
gain/loss per pip $10 on one pip move.

Standard Account (Example: $1000 usually, some broker require $2,000)
gain/loss per pip is $10, but you can choose to trade all 100,000 units, making gain/loss per pip $100 on one pip move?

I assume the higher the leverage, the more lots you can trade on both?
Meaning since each lots is worth $1, or $10, mini, or standard account.
The gains would compound by 1 each to you add an extra lot? 200:1 means a $20 pip move if you choos to trade both lots at once?

Also, on a $10,000 you are trading in the Million dollar lots next, correct?
On 100:1 a standard move can be chosen to be traded, 1 pip move is $100 gain/loss?

Not to sound sarcastic, but i've spoken to many operators, and even afew brokers, and they all say the samething. Something you all like to complicate many times. Keep it simple. Nomatter the strategy, or amount you trade according to your risk. This is STILL a casino, and we are all technical gamblers, it may sound insulting, but. That's what you/we are doing, we are gambling off of our speculation on what the big players & traders are doing with their money. If we are right, we profit, ifnot we lose that amount over the stoploss, or the initial risk. It isn't rocket science, this is a speculation game, nothing more, nothing less. You shouldn't be so quick to discourage an aggressive trader, or one with the wants, or potential to do so.

It all depends upon your perception and what you find consistent to capitialize on the small gaps, and loop holes that happen when these big traders effect the market. Basically, you are being advised to turtle with your money. Ofcourse it's safer, but do you think big name traders got to where they are by playing safe? No, they got there because they made it by seizing the moment. They betted on things that were certain, leverage won't matter if you know what you are betting on. There are brokers that offer high leverage on demo accounts, up to 900:1. You just have to practice, become consistent, then kill emotion. Trade in realtime, assuming your broker doesn't manipulate you, or the price. But, that has nothing to do with your strategy against the market. So, you are trading against three beings. You, the broker and the random market.

Higher leverage is a way for your broker to wipe you out, plus spreads and fees etc. But, also. It can be a counter strategy, just an aggressive one.
Like all casinos, forex isn't just going to hand you your winnings based off of how safe you play. They want you to take big risks so they can wipe you out when you become consistent. Maybe you all should read The Art of War.
Turtling with small funds is cute, but. When you lose, that's all you've lost.

Smalll funds, nomatter how big, or small the leverage. The gains/losses aren't even yours until you get them, so let him pick his own style. It doesnot inspire confidence, neither careful confidence when you are being one sided about a style of play. Newbie, or not. Which ever works, best suits his handle on his interpitation on the game. Turtling/trading with small leverage and amounts is what i consider a long term strategy itself. Short term is for the aggressive players. Just how do you think Warren Buffet got all those billions?! By playing safe ALL the time?!

[firestar99]

Klaka:

I did notice this kind of thing, from Marketiva, of all places. Become consistent too long and then you lose BIG, even WITH good intuition. At first I thought it was just my imagination but it happened three times in a row when I became too consistend and made too many points for their liking.

[valueinvestor]

Originally Posted by firestar99

Klaka: I did notice this kind of thing, from Marketiva, of all places. Become consistent too long and then you lose BIG, even WITH good intuition. At first I thought it was just my imagination but it happened three times in a row when I became too consistend and made too many points for their liking.

What you don't mention (but I assume) what is that you are consistent in?

A) I will assume you are talking about being consistent in winning trades, and not;

B) Being consistent in making profit (these are two very different things);

If you are consistent in (A), you will never be consistent in (B). Being consistent in (A) is a way to lose all your money, because it just shows you are forcing every position to go into profit, which is absolutely impossible. By being able to cut losses, you will not be consistent in (A) but possibly consistent in (B).

Firestar99, you seem smart judging from your previous posts, but I can surely say that you are not an experienced trader. I don't want to make you feel bad, but this is just what I am sure in from my own long investment experience

[Takiii]

Originally Posted by valueinvestor

What you don't mention (but I assume) what is that you are consistent in?

A) I will assume you are talking about being consistent in winning trades, and not;

B) Being consistent in making profit (these are two very different things);

If you are consistent in (A), you will never be consistent in (B). Being consistent in (A) is a way to lose all your money, because it just shows you are forcing every position to go into profit, which is absolutely impossible. By being able to cut losses, you will not be consistent in (A) but possibly consistent in (B).

Firestar99, you seem smart judging from your previous posts, but I can surely say that you are not an experienced trader. I don't want to make you feel bad, but this is just what I am sure in from my own long investment experience

This post is so strange. DUDE u cant have B if u dont have A...If you are trading losses consistently you are going to make profit? Cmon now, be serious.

[Takiii]

some people will say to you 3-5% monthly is too much. I wonder where that guy is who claims 2% a year is called for.

Anyway 3-5% monthly is not too little. If you have a heavy investment you can make a fair bit of cash. But if you are trading 5$, making cents a month would hurt.

[Jeep]

I am brand new here and thinking about the forex market... Is Marketiva one of the best to use? Are their companies out there that use scam methods? Does anybody make money referring people to forex? I would be happy to sign up through them.