Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ASTA Signal Service

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Maybe these systems could be offered as separate signals for subs with larger accounts?

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by ProfBernardo View Post
      we can generate a LOT better systems (and we have done so), but these need a whole lot more minimum balance than a few thousands
      How so? I hear this sometimes from others and I don't get it. Unless your system is sensitive to slippage and spread (fast moving or small profits) then how is it different taking a 0.01 lot trade on a $1k account vs a 1 lot trade on a $100k account?

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by idempotent View Post
        How so? I hear this sometimes from others and I don't get it. Unless your system is sensitive to slippage and spread (fast moving or small profits) then how is it different taking a 0.01 lot trade on a $1k account vs a 1 lot trade on a $100k account?
        The answer would be that it would need even smaller lot sizes that 0.01 on a $1000 account.

        Comment


        • #64
          performance", "(retail) user friendliness" and "opportunity costs". The definition of these are simple. Peformance is the peformance of the system. Not even the return/drawdown, but more importantly consistency and/or recovery abilities. User friednliness comes down to the amount of money every single investor or user needs to operate this system properly. Opportunity costs are on our side and mean, that it does not make any financial sense to pump money into a system, that is returning far less the top of the range ones. So with every single coin waster on a lower end system, we lose ability to scale on the better systems. Its not that dramatic, but you get the point.

          Now comes the problem, because you can only tailor a system in the direction of two points, while the other becomes worse. Giving you the two most extreme examples that build the boundaries:
          1) Offering the top notch system to public and subscribers. The performance is better and our opportunity costs are zero, because thats the way the prop accounts are working. But at the same time user friendliness

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by ProfBernardo View Post
            performance", "(retail) user friendliness" and "opportunity costs". The definition of these are simple. Peformance is the peformance of the system. Not even the return/drawdown, but more importantly consistency and/or recovery abilities. User friednliness comes down to the amount of money every single investor or user needs to operate this system properly. Opportunity costs are on our side and mean, that it does not make any financial sense to pump money into a system, that is returning far less the top of the range ones. So with every single coin waster on a lower end system, we lose ability to scale on the better systems. Its not that dramatic, but you get the point.

            Now comes the problem, because you can only tailor a system in the direction of two points, while the other becomes worse. Giving you the two most extreme examples that build the boundaries:
            1) Offering the top notch system to public and subscribers. The performance is better and our opportunity costs are zero, because thats the way the prop accounts are working. But at the same time user friendliness
            I find it slightly hard to imagine a system of 100k+ which is trading 0.01 lot sizes. Even if there are LOTS of trades seems very unusual

            Comment


            • #66

              Comment


              • #67
                Personally I have around a 10k account so sounds like your system would need a larger account than this to run correctly

                Comment


                • #68
                  You should be fine with your 10k account. We are working on a solution to top it a bit up in terms of performance for the cost of a little raised min. balance. You have now seen about 6 months of history with the current system and with me as the support you have to deal with. So i think that a slightly raised needed minimum balance is a viable option when i can help active subscribers to get in touch with a better risk/return model. Will keep you updated.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Thanks Prof!

                    I can't speak for "everyone" here, but I'm sure there are few of us who would be interested in the 'high balance' system. If I'm not mistaken, I've seen as high as $50k minimum balance requirement for other signals. I'd say anywhere between that and $100k, pretty sure there ARE people here who would subscribe, provided it's a good system of course. Count me in for sure.

                    EDIT: this may seem obvious but I'll throw it out anyway. I like high frequency trades because of the rebates I get. So far through my forex journey, I've been enjoying a sizeable (in my opinion at least) "passive income" from the rebates I get, enough to meet my monthly car repayments. More trades = more rebates.
                    Last edited by sanriopurin; 12-06-2014, 02:33 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by sanriopurin View Post
                      Thanks Prof!

                      I can't speak for "everyone" here, but I'm sure there are few of us who would be interested in the 'high balance' system. If I'm not mistaken, I've seen as high as $50k minimum balance requirement for other signals. I'd say anywhere between that and $100k, pretty sure there ARE people here who would subscribe, provided it's a good system of course. Count me in for sure.

                      EDIT: this may seem obvious but I'll throw it out anyway. I like high frequency trades because of the rebates I get. So far through my forex journey, I've been enjoying a sizeable (in my opinion at least) "passive income" from the rebates I get, enough to meet my monthly car repayments. More trades = more rebates.
                      What broker/rebate system are you with? I'm almost certain that you'd make more in returns from lower spread at a broker like IC Markets than your be getting in rebates...

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        I don't think you should look at a rebate from your OWN account as passive income......
                        Why on earth wouldn't you want 1 trade that makes you 2% rather than 1000 trades that make you 2%. After all the commission you'd only have 1% rather than 2%.

                        Yo no comprende

                        More trades = broker more money

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Big River Man View Post
                          I don't think you should look at a rebate from your OWN account as passive income......
                          Why on earth wouldn't you want 1 trade that makes you 2% rather than 1000 trades that make you 2%. After all the commission you'd only have 1% rather than 2%.

                          Yo no comprende

                          More trades = broker more money
                          I think most people only look at returns once commission is taken into account. So 1000 trades with 2% return after commission or 1 trade with 2% after commission...no difference to me

                          Comment


                          • #73

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              I do use IC Markets, with rebates. www.forexreward.org

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                There's another reason why I prefer 1000 trades that return 2% than 1 trade that returns the same:

                                This happened to me, for real I kid you not. Recently (weeks ago) there were 3 closed trades from SmartScalper, can't remember exactly which ones (probably GBPJPY). One losing, one winning (to cover the first losing trade), and the last one is the 'profit trade'.

                                Lo and behold my VPS went down for literally 10 minutes or so, and I missed that one last trade out of the three. So in this case, let's say it's 3 trades = 2%. I would rather have 1000 trades = 2%, as long as they're not disproportionately martingale'd in terms of lot size (and I believe ASTA will never resort to such things). So if I miss a few, I'd still get the majority of the intended profit.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X