95% myth

I am quite surprised that they only have 108,000 accounts between them, I thought it would be far more.
 
Re: US Forex brokers profitability report for Q1 2011

tar said:
http://forexmagnates.com/us-forex-brokers-profitability-report-for-q1-2011/
Click to expand...
As modest as I am, I have to tell you I was personally responsible for pulling OANDA over the coals for their previous BS on this score. I had a conference call with the NFA compliance team after OANDA’s previous quarter ‘results’. Particularly embarrassing for all concerned as OANDA‘s CEO Michael Stumm is chair for the NFA committee on precisely these data. LOL.

Don’t get hung up on the ‘only 108,000’ accounts – it’s a largely different set of 108,000 accounts each quarter.
 
Re: US Forex brokers profitability report for Q1 2011

TheBramble said:
As modest as I am, I have to tell you I was personally responsible for pulling OANDA over the coals for their previous BS on this score. I had a conference call with the NFA compliance team after OANDA’s previous quarter ‘results’. Particularly embarrassing for all concerned as OANDA‘s CEO Michael Stumm is chair for the NFA committee on precisely these data. LOL.

Don’t get hung up on the ‘only 108,000’ accounts – it’s a largely different set of 108,000 accounts each quarter.
Click to expand...

It wasn't only you , it was clear that Oanda have used a different calculation method ( included dormant accounts with higher balance because of interest paid ) , everybody contacted the CFTC & NFA about that .
 
Last edited:
Re: US Forex brokers profitability report for Q1 2011

tar said:
It wasn't only you , it was clear that Oanda have used a different calculation method ( included dormant accounts with higher balance because of interest paid ) , everybody contacted the CFTC & NFA about that .
Click to expand...
Even my 15 mins wasn't my 15 mins. What a tawdry life.....
 
Just read more carefully the details from the link you posted tar.

In my conversations with the NFA on OANDA’s Q4 2010 they confirmed categorically that OANDA only used ‘active’ trading accounts in their calculations as did all brokers. There had to have been at least one trade made on the account during the reporting period. They confirmed this to me in a second call after consulting directly with Stumm.

So they either knowingly lied or OANDA lied to them.

I’ll take this up with them and let you know how it pans out.
 
Then someone is telling porkies....

Abstract of email from Michael Stumm CEO of OANDA and Chairman of NFA 's Forex Dealer Member Advisory Committee (!) to me dated January 21st this year regarding my communications with NFA and OANDA with respect to calculation of client profitability as detailed in their annual report for 2010 and with specific respect to the data provided for Q4 2010.

“Throughout your communication with our customer service department, the agent referred you to sections of our Website that highlighted OANDA's policy for calculating the profitability percentages. With respect to your follow-on question regarding active vs. inactive accounts, OANDA's customer service agent regrettably responded to you with incorrect information.

I can assure you that we do not include inactive accounts in our calculations for the quarterly profitability disclosure.” {Stumm’s emphasis}

Bear in mind the directives to include only active accounts in the profitability disclosure data were issued by the NFA on September 30th 2010.
 
Re: Then someone is telling porkies....

TheBramble said:
Bear in mind the directives to include only active accounts in the profitability disclosure data were issued by the NFA on September 30th 2010.
Click to expand...

What is the definition for "active accounts" ? here was the problem until the NFA made the final clarification :

" “NFA has received a number of questions regarding what it means to be an “open” account for purposes of this calculation. For example, there is some confusion regarding whether an account that maintained a cash balance, but had no open positions and no trading during quarter, should be included in the calculation.
After consultation with CFTC staff, NFA provides the following information:
The calculation, including determining the total number of non-discretionary retail forex customer accounts maintained by the RFED and FCM that quarter, should include only accounts that executed any trades during the quarter and/or had an open position at any time during the quarter. Any account that did not execute any trades or have an open position during the quarter should not be included in the calculation regardless of whether the account maintained a cash balance and/or was paid interest or charged any fees during the quarter.“ "

http://forexmagnates.com/nfa-clarif...rs-account-profitability-calculation-methods/
 
It was certainly clear and had regulatory significance by September 30th 2010. After my communciations with NFA and Stumm.
 
tar said:
25th Jan 2011

http://www.nfa.futures.org/news/newsNotice.asp?ArticleID=3746
Click to expand...

Nope.

That was just 4 days after the flurry of comms I had with them. Part of that flurry of comms was a verbal confirmation during my call with NFA compliance (Sharon Pendleton, Diane Spreadbury, Matt Soldato (legal?), Lauren Boehm (PA/admin)) which I confirmed by email a couple of days later while I was still waiting for a response from Stumm:-

“As it stands at the moment I have OANDA claiming profitability stats which are dubious. We also have OANDA giving information to the public purportedly on the basis of the disclosure directives, but which are completely at odds with those directives as issued by NFA on September 30 and as outlined to me by you on the phone two days back.”

September 30th 2010 was the date given to me by NFA around January 19th 2011.
 
But this is all missing the point.

Stumm confirmed by email that OANDA were NOT using inactive accounts in the profitability data for Q4 2010.

The link you posted which kicked this current discussion off, by implication, suggests that OANDA WERE including inactive accounts at that time.
 
That the Chairman of NFA 's own Forex Dealer Member Advisory Committee was in breach of their own directives is serious enough, but must also cast doubt on the viability of Stumm's currently slated tensure to 2013 in that position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
95% of traders lose... This is nothing more than a myth.
6 7 8
Replies
146
Views
39K
tradernumber
T
VingTsunKuen
I think there is something wrong..do you think so??
Replies
15
Views
4K
wackypete2
W
N
FSA and Spreadbetting plus Forex
Replies
5
Views
2K
alex2006
A
BSD
Profitability of fx traders - no opinions, just numbers thank you very much
2
Replies
23
Views
5K
TheBramble
T
R
what can i expect trading fx for a prop firm
Replies
5
Views
2K
MORGZTRADER
M
Top