SAVIUS a new prop firm looking for traders and...your comments
Prop Test! business model
There seems to be various business models at the middle or lower end of the Prop trading " Business"
1) AT the very top end very large firms / banks etc where they Hire people with high end education and give salary .. they will still kick you out if you don;t perform
NO capital contribution or "Training costs" for the trader
Completely regulated
2) Same as 1 but no salary ( Regulated you need to be Series 7 etc in US)
3) Charges large fee for education + capital contribution .. still regulated
4) Companies like yours , charges a smaller fee for a test , little or no education
This business model of having a base test at$198-300 etc is great for you but why it has such a bad reputation is because it seems to be based on just collecting the $200 fee over and over again and hoping that out of 100 only 2 needs to be funded
So if you are so ethical why not make the test still tough but free of cost!
BY THE WAY THERE IS NOT EVEN A STREET ADDRESS ON YOUR WEBSITE!
There seems to be various business models at the middle or lower end of the Prop trading " Business"
1) AT the very top end very large firms / banks etc where they Hire people with high end education and give salary .. they will still kick you out if you don;t perform
NO capital contribution or "Training costs" for the trader
Completely regulated
2) Same as 1 but no salary ( Regulated you need to be Series 7 etc in US)
3) Charges large fee for education + capital contribution .. still regulated
4) Companies like yours , charges a smaller fee for a test , little or no education
This business model of having a base test at$198-300 etc is great for you but why it has such a bad reputation is because it seems to be based on just collecting the $200 fee over and over again and hoping that out of 100 only 2 needs to be funded
So if you are so ethical why not make the test still tough but free of cost!
BY THE WAY THERE IS NOT EVEN A STREET ADDRESS ON YOUR WEBSITE!
Last edited:
Hi Robert,
Yes it appears that our Trading Challenge is more expensive but i wouldn't say we have the same business model. We are a Propfirm first and foremost and are using the Challenge as one of many recruiting vehicles. We also hire Senior traders with existing real money performance (no challenge, no fee required) and from time to time we give challenges away when we need to hire a new Junior trader (we just gave 15 challenges for free in a special event sponsored by Infinity Futures).
Thank you,
Prop Models
Thanks moka2 : great analysis!
Everything you wrote is absolutely true.
When we launched this project with my partners we studied all prop firm models and created Savius with the idea to take the best and leave the worst of each .
Model 1 ( as per your description) , too selective, leaves out a lot of good traders just for a sort of “discrimination”. Furthermore the best traders we met did not come from famous universities.
Model 2 .as you say, same as model 1 but no salary
Model 3: We didn’t like the idea of mandatory education . One should take the program if he/she feels in need for it.
That model is based on the idea to use the funds the junior pays for his education to cover his trading risk once he goes live. In that way the firm is always risk free.
Same if the Prop ask for capital contribution: they provide financial leverage and charge possibly increased commissions but take no risk.
Trading is taking a controlled risk and we are mostly traders, so we discarded also this model.
Model 4: you can include us in this category somehow but with a few differences.
Education is nowadays a very competitive business and very energy consuming.
Partners come from the trading industry not from education or marketing, that is why we like to focus on what we know best.
That being said , as we do trade, we are sure of our method and we are there to show it to those who want to learn it, but it s not at all mandatory.
As per above we have taken a few traders live as you say, without any capital contribution .
Why not making it harder and free of charge?
As without even that small capital contribution from aspiring traders the Challenge will turn into a big Playstation. Making money on the sim account is extremely easy, there is no emotional attachment. Making it with a trading plan is harder, and when you try to transform that result into real money most of the times the gap is huge.
We do need some sort of filter and the Challenge is conceived to put traders under stress: they pay some money and they have to perform . That being said passing Challenge it’s not at all a guarantee that they will be profitable when they trade our funds.
Let s be brutally honest about this for once:
1) If you are a professional trader you do not need our leverage, you may be interested in Savius just to become part of a structure with a potential career development .
2) The cost of the Challenge is the equivalent of a 20 tics trade on crude, and the standard future trader would use that risk everyday. If you are not ready to commit to that amount of risk it is probably better if you don’t trade live anyway.
3) Even if you are a beginner who decides to take the Challenge or the Combine with Topstep and you don’t manage to pass, still you have probably learned a lot more and saved more money than trading by yourself.
4) For the same reason, we basically need to sell more than 6 Challenges ( consider slippage) to cover the risk of one live trader. To make a living out of those 200 USD we would need to sell a few hundreds : that is not our business model and we don’t have the structure in place to do it . A performing live trader can make in a day the equivalent of selling 10 Challenges. That is more our business model.
5) The ugly truth is ,that so far we are pouring money to finance junior traders but we haven’t found yet any super star. The partners are still the best traders of the company, but we believe that our strength is still being able to select good investments with high risk reward, so we are pretty relaxed and look forward to build slowly our team of traders.
The office.:
If you check my linked in profile you will notice I just left my trading position just one month ago. We will have an office in Monaco for sure as we are opening a branch here, but it will take us time for the legal setup , etc , so probably it will take us 6 months or so.
Our headquarters are in Chicago at 111 West Jackon, right next to the CME, but most of our traders are currently trading remotely.
As I said we are a small startup, so we don’t have 5 offices around the globe with 100 traders and I don’t use a private jet to travel. Still we are serious professionals and we know our business enough to risk our money on this project.
Fair enough?
Thanks moka2 : great analysis!
Everything you wrote is absolutely true.
When we launched this project with my partners we studied all prop firm models and created Savius with the idea to take the best and leave the worst of each .
Model 1 ( as per your description) , too selective, leaves out a lot of good traders just for a sort of “discrimination”. Furthermore the best traders we met did not come from famous universities.
Model 2 .as you say, same as model 1 but no salary
Model 3: We didn’t like the idea of mandatory education . One should take the program if he/she feels in need for it.
That model is based on the idea to use the funds the junior pays for his education to cover his trading risk once he goes live. In that way the firm is always risk free.
Same if the Prop ask for capital contribution: they provide financial leverage and charge possibly increased commissions but take no risk.
Trading is taking a controlled risk and we are mostly traders, so we discarded also this model.
Model 4: you can include us in this category somehow but with a few differences.
Education is nowadays a very competitive business and very energy consuming.
Partners come from the trading industry not from education or marketing, that is why we like to focus on what we know best.
That being said , as we do trade, we are sure of our method and we are there to show it to those who want to learn it, but it s not at all mandatory.
As per above we have taken a few traders live as you say, without any capital contribution .
Why not making it harder and free of charge?
As without even that small capital contribution from aspiring traders the Challenge will turn into a big Playstation. Making money on the sim account is extremely easy, there is no emotional attachment. Making it with a trading plan is harder, and when you try to transform that result into real money most of the times the gap is huge.
We do need some sort of filter and the Challenge is conceived to put traders under stress: they pay some money and they have to perform . That being said passing Challenge it’s not at all a guarantee that they will be profitable when they trade our funds.
Let s be brutally honest about this for once:
1) If you are a professional trader you do not need our leverage, you may be interested in Savius just to become part of a structure with a potential career development .
2) The cost of the Challenge is the equivalent of a 20 tics trade on crude, and the standard future trader would use that risk everyday. If you are not ready to commit to that amount of risk it is probably better if you don’t trade live anyway.
3) Even if you are a beginner who decides to take the Challenge or the Combine with Topstep and you don’t manage to pass, still you have probably learned a lot more and saved more money than trading by yourself.
4) For the same reason, we basically need to sell more than 6 Challenges ( consider slippage) to cover the risk of one live trader. To make a living out of those 200 USD we would need to sell a few hundreds : that is not our business model and we don’t have the structure in place to do it . A performing live trader can make in a day the equivalent of selling 10 Challenges. That is more our business model.
5) The ugly truth is ,that so far we are pouring money to finance junior traders but we haven’t found yet any super star. The partners are still the best traders of the company, but we believe that our strength is still being able to select good investments with high risk reward, so we are pretty relaxed and look forward to build slowly our team of traders.
The office.:
If you check my linked in profile you will notice I just left my trading position just one month ago. We will have an office in Monaco for sure as we are opening a branch here, but it will take us time for the legal setup , etc , so probably it will take us 6 months or so.
Our headquarters are in Chicago at 111 West Jackon, right next to the CME, but most of our traders are currently trading remotely.
As I said we are a small startup, so we don’t have 5 offices around the globe with 100 traders and I don’t use a private jet to travel. Still we are serious professionals and we know our business enough to risk our money on this project.
Fair enough?
"2) The cost of the Challenge is the equivalent of a 20 tics trade on crude, and the standard future trader would use that risk everyday. If you are not ready to commit to that amount of risk it is probably better if you don’t trade live anyway."
That is what all the snake oil sales person say when asked probing questions!
It seems the model is churn the $200 as many times as possible and hope vast majority fail.. Otherwise why do you have that fee? Have the test for sure and screen them ,, by the way you say you are based in USA .. does that mean for a prop trader the joining person has to have series 7 exam? like more older forms like Bright Trading and T3 requires!
about myself and the fees
Mate,
This is a forum and you are free to have an opinion and to express it openly.
My CV is online on Linkedin for everyone to look at, so I m not hiding behind a finger.
I have a few traders and brokers from big financial institutions who endorsed me for finance, trading risk management, etc.. It doesn't look like a coincidence but you are free to think that I am a “snake oil sales person”.
In the end nobody knows who you are and what you do for living, still I think you have the right to say freely what you think here, and that is why I like this forum.
Let’s look into your idea of making the selection totally free for a second.
If we do it , we will probably have a few thousands subscribers per week.
At that point even my grandmother would give it a try, it would be like giving away free lottery tickets.
Savius will have to manage all these contacts, answering emails, helping them for the setup, controlling the performances, possibly paying platform fees for etc. All at our cost and expenses.
Then a bunch of subscribers actually passes some very hard test, which at this point will be mostly as difficult and aleatory as winning the national lottery.
We take them live and if they lose money we absorb the loss.
Would you invest in such a company yourself? I personally wouldn’t and I won’t .
On the series 7
We do not require any series 7 exam as we trade only futures and we are not a regulated entity anyway.
As I said many times, we do not trade using other people’s money.
Mate,
This is a forum and you are free to have an opinion and to express it openly.
My CV is online on Linkedin for everyone to look at, so I m not hiding behind a finger.
I have a few traders and brokers from big financial institutions who endorsed me for finance, trading risk management, etc.. It doesn't look like a coincidence but you are free to think that I am a “snake oil sales person”.
In the end nobody knows who you are and what you do for living, still I think you have the right to say freely what you think here, and that is why I like this forum.
Let’s look into your idea of making the selection totally free for a second.
If we do it , we will probably have a few thousands subscribers per week.
At that point even my grandmother would give it a try, it would be like giving away free lottery tickets.
Savius will have to manage all these contacts, answering emails, helping them for the setup, controlling the performances, possibly paying platform fees for etc. All at our cost and expenses.
Then a bunch of subscribers actually passes some very hard test, which at this point will be mostly as difficult and aleatory as winning the national lottery.
We take them live and if they lose money we absorb the loss.
Would you invest in such a company yourself? I personally wouldn’t and I won’t .
On the series 7
We do not require any series 7 exam as we trade only futures and we are not a regulated entity anyway.
As I said many times, we do not trade using other people’s money.
alexaherself
Established member
- Messages
- 560
- Likes
- 149
Aren't we all?
My opinion is that the entire thread is pure spam, and I don't see why you shouldn't pay to advertise on the site, if that's what you want to do, just like so many other businesses do.
As an active member, I resent it being here, and I don't understand why the owner allows it, knowing (as he does) that it typifies what's increasingly driving his members away - some even say so, very openly.
(Edited to add: and "You don't have to read it, if you don't like it" isn't an answer to that observation: it occupies a space on the front-page listings for this forum, whether I read it or not, and that's exactly what I and others are complaining about. You've never made one single post anywhere in this forum apart from in this thread and your sole purpose for being here is self-promotional.)
Last edited:
You are certainly using smart arguments in your defense and may be your intentions are not BAD however I hope you understand WHY this model raises such questions! And WHY NOT let EVERY TOM DICK AND HARRY take the free test... just tell them NO email support be given IF YOUR TRUE AIM IS TO SCREEN THE GOOD ONEs,, you will still get them! , and simple thing like not having a proper address on website.. another red flag !
This is the lowest form of so called Prop trading... IMHO
Ciao moka,
fair enough, I understand your point .
Address in on the website and I hope to have new office in Monaco soon.
On the rest I reckon that in a few weeks/months we will have got in touch with enough people and they will be able to express their judgement about their direct experience with us, and that would clarify if we are in good faith or not.
fair enough, I understand your point .
Address in on the website and I hope to have new office in Monaco soon.
On the rest I reckon that in a few weeks/months we will have got in touch with enough people and they will be able to express their judgement about their direct experience with us, and that would clarify if we are in good faith or not.
alexaherself
Established member
- Messages
- 560
- Likes
- 149
We can already draw conclusions about your "bona fides" for ourselves, from the obvious lack of good faith in the way you're abusing the forum's hospitality by posting here for purely self-promotional purposes, as discussed in post #27 above.
You're a spammer, and an unwelcome one.
nickycambo
Junior member
- Messages
- 15
- Likes
- 5
Do it yourself
Then the question arises, if all the above are true, why bother to run a prop shop? Just take your capital and trade it yourself.
Then the question arises, if all the above are true, why bother to run a prop shop? Just take your capital and trade it yourself.
All the partners in Savius trade for living and I am actually in the process of setting up a fund in Monaco ( if I manage to get the license otherwise I ll go for a family office). I have been a professional trader since 2007 and I have no intention to stop.
Savius project had multiple purposes:
- parteners risk diversification. we spread risk over many traders/strategies . It s also an investment in a field that we know that is not directly related to our ability to trade but more on the management skills
- select a team of elite traders that could produce revenue, so that we would not be necessarily obliged to be in front of the screen everyday . We could also use Savius as recruitment center for other companies.
I personally also liked the idea of getting in contact with people and try to provide a service that was not there when I started and I genuinely believe is useful.
Savius project had multiple purposes:
- parteners risk diversification. we spread risk over many traders/strategies . It s also an investment in a field that we know that is not directly related to our ability to trade but more on the management skills
- select a team of elite traders that could produce revenue, so that we would not be necessarily obliged to be in front of the screen everyday . We could also use Savius as recruitment center for other companies.
I personally also liked the idea of getting in contact with people and try to provide a service that was not there when I started and I genuinely believe is useful.
Appreciate the long explanation but this still does answers the question and bad press and skepticism about the model where it is suspected that the so called Prop firm is just interested in large no of people taking the $200 test , and hope 98% fail... Instead how about this idea You as a prop firm just act as financier only to those traders who want to put up risk capital! 10 from trader, 90 from you, you charge a fixed Interest on capital applied + a small performance fee .. this will be more transparent.. when I looked at somebody like Bright trading in US that is what they offer ( almost) NO free lunch to anybody!
Hey Moka,
what you say is absolutely correct and I totally understand.
We studied all different type of models before picking up this one .
The one you mentioned in particular is much more capital intense and doesnt look exceptionally fair either to me.
Let s look at it together:
You put down 10 pct of the capital, and I but down the remain 90%, but I overcharge you with fees of any sort (from commissions to interest as you say etc). If you lose 10 pct of the capital I stop you.
This means you are taking ALL the risk, I m surely making money on the commissions plus I ll make money in case you are a profitable trader. Yes a small % of money but at no risk!
Ah and in all this your are completely by yourself most of the times, unless you want to by my course off course , which cost ranges from 5 to 10K.
Surely this model has for the owner a better risk reward than what I am trying to achieve and that is why you also need a different type of regulation.
Doesnt seem like a good deal for a beginner trader to me, but that is my opinion.
As far as we are concerned, again lets run the numbers. I ll run them with what we have experience so far and I do not know if then the % of those passing the Challenge will go down to 2%, for the time being is 26%. These are the numbers we have and I can prove it. So we sell 100 tests at 200 , but cash only 14800 as 26 traders passed the challenge and go live. Of those 26 , 60% or 16 will simply lose all their risk straight away so 16 * 1500 = 24,000 USD.
At this point I m negative territory already without considering all the other related costs (salaries, office, softwares, etc). I need those 10 traders left to perform well enough and for long enough to give a chance to recover.
So again, why bothering then?
We are not the good Samaritan of trading, but I do believe by my experience that if I find the right people they can make back whatever we lost. So far we let live traders do how whatever they liked but it has not been a wise choice: people who get to us are obviously not pro and do need assistance. So my hope is to be able to keep as many traders trading live as possible with an accurate risk management so that we could maybe get the famous " home run" and I m sure we will get it.
Meanwhile, sure, I dont mind selling some other services to try and amortize my risk and I dont see anything wrong about it, especially considering one of them is risk management and from what I can see from see there is a big need for that.
Does this make sense for you?
what you say is absolutely correct and I totally understand.
We studied all different type of models before picking up this one .
The one you mentioned in particular is much more capital intense and doesnt look exceptionally fair either to me.
Let s look at it together:
You put down 10 pct of the capital, and I but down the remain 90%, but I overcharge you with fees of any sort (from commissions to interest as you say etc). If you lose 10 pct of the capital I stop you.
This means you are taking ALL the risk, I m surely making money on the commissions plus I ll make money in case you are a profitable trader. Yes a small % of money but at no risk!
Ah and in all this your are completely by yourself most of the times, unless you want to by my course off course , which cost ranges from 5 to 10K.
Surely this model has for the owner a better risk reward than what I am trying to achieve and that is why you also need a different type of regulation.
Doesnt seem like a good deal for a beginner trader to me, but that is my opinion.
As far as we are concerned, again lets run the numbers. I ll run them with what we have experience so far and I do not know if then the % of those passing the Challenge will go down to 2%, for the time being is 26%. These are the numbers we have and I can prove it. So we sell 100 tests at 200 , but cash only 14800 as 26 traders passed the challenge and go live. Of those 26 , 60% or 16 will simply lose all their risk straight away so 16 * 1500 = 24,000 USD.
At this point I m negative territory already without considering all the other related costs (salaries, office, softwares, etc). I need those 10 traders left to perform well enough and for long enough to give a chance to recover.
So again, why bothering then?
We are not the good Samaritan of trading, but I do believe by my experience that if I find the right people they can make back whatever we lost. So far we let live traders do how whatever they liked but it has not been a wise choice: people who get to us are obviously not pro and do need assistance. So my hope is to be able to keep as many traders trading live as possible with an accurate risk management so that we could maybe get the famous " home run" and I m sure we will get it.
Meanwhile, sure, I dont mind selling some other services to try and amortize my risk and I dont see anything wrong about it, especially considering one of them is risk management and from what I can see from see there is a big need for that.
Does this make sense for you?
Well ,Moka , thanks for the comments , I understand your point and I would eventually consider a model switch in the future but :
1) you are right, regulations are totally different.Much more complex as basically the company becomes similar to any financial institution that collects third party money. We currently do not trade anyone else s money and I like it that way.
2) the risk of that model really scares me. With all our risk controls etc, we still have live traders taking slippage or "forgetting" to use stops properly etc. Can you imagine sitting with 90% risk of a bunch of beginner traders thru an event like the Swiss Franc move? Having only 10% of cash collateral as guarantee?
I wouldnt sleep at night. That is probably why that kind of prop model actually charges so much in fees , as there is a potential high risk involved.
For what concerns the Salary thing I agree with you, that is how a trader should be trading, without having to worry constantly about performing to pay rent.
We do started that way: employing people, but did not worked very well for us.
I assume that also to be employed as engineer you will need a Degree and probably the car manufacturer will take you thru a series of interviews and tests .
The difference is that when you hire an engineer with a certain CV you can be almost sure he knows how to do his/her job, but with trading there is no University , if not experience, and no guarantees at all that even a good trader will continue to perform well.
1) you are right, regulations are totally different.Much more complex as basically the company becomes similar to any financial institution that collects third party money. We currently do not trade anyone else s money and I like it that way.
2) the risk of that model really scares me. With all our risk controls etc, we still have live traders taking slippage or "forgetting" to use stops properly etc. Can you imagine sitting with 90% risk of a bunch of beginner traders thru an event like the Swiss Franc move? Having only 10% of cash collateral as guarantee?
I wouldnt sleep at night. That is probably why that kind of prop model actually charges so much in fees , as there is a potential high risk involved.
For what concerns the Salary thing I agree with you, that is how a trader should be trading, without having to worry constantly about performing to pay rent.
We do started that way: employing people, but did not worked very well for us.
I assume that also to be employed as engineer you will need a Degree and probably the car manufacturer will take you thru a series of interviews and tests .
The difference is that when you hire an engineer with a certain CV you can be almost sure he knows how to do his/her job, but with trading there is no University , if not experience, and no guarantees at all that even a good trader will continue to perform well.
SpunkyTrader
Newbie
- Messages
- 1
- Likes
- 0
Anyone have any feedback yet?
I was looking for prop firms on the internet and came across this thread, and I really had to make this post, my first one since 2008 when I became a member 
I'm just giving my 2 cents here on how this business model actually works, as I went through the process at TopStep ( which is absolutely the same kind of business as Savius, no matter what anyone says).
So here is what I realized after being funded by TST.. I spent about 5 months worth of continuous combine fees (over $800,00) for about 8 months total. I failed it twice and managed to pass it twice. The first time I passed it, I had to do the FTP (funded trader prep), in which they add 2 other rules to be followed: You have 10 days to trade (you can chose those) and reach a profit of $750,00. Your winning percentage must be at least 45%. I failed that and went back to the combine. After another couple of months (paying the fees obviously) I passed it again and finally got funded. So, I had to follow those stupid rules again on the funded account, being positive after the 10th day and have at least 45% winning days.
Sounds pretty easy right? The problem with trading those first 10 days is that in such a short period of time, the outcome of your trading tends to be pretty random. If you take any successful trader's track record over the years and divide it by blocks of 10 days, you will see that many of those blocks will have a negative P&L, but the trader will still be profitable in the long term. You can even do a simulation of that on a computer. Drawdowns happen all the time and they don't have any specific time to start or end. But a successful trader will always be able to recover over time.
In the FTP and in the first 10 days trading live you don't have such a luxury of a drawdown. Even a little one will be hard to overcome, given that its gonna affect your psychology as well. It just adds more pressure on the trader. It makes trading much more difficult. You just cannot set a time limit for something that works with probabilities. There is only so much a trader can control.
They have the odds on their side you see, they are the Casino and we are the gamblers. They know all the probabilities of a trader being successful after those 10 days and they take advantage of that. The less people passing the test, the better.
I had a little chat with the CEO, Mr Patak, and he said basically I needed more screen time (did I laugh?) and I should sign up for another combine. Then I asked for a free first month of a new one, since I had already passed it twice, and he said the company takes all the risk and the free month of a continuous combine wouldn't apply in my case. The point is, is he really interested in funding traders? I don't think so.
And does the company takes all the risk? I am 100% sure they DON'T! And here is why: I spent over $800,00 on fees to pass the combine. I lost the company only $700,00 in those 10 days. So, $800 - $700 = $100,00 profit for them. Who actually lost money overall?? I think I was the one. Do the business lose any money with traders at all? Absolutely not. I've heard of traders taking a year or even many years to pass the combine. Let's say 12 months on average (being conservative). So, 12 times $ 130,00 (the 30K combine ) is $1560,00 in fees. The max drawdown if you get funded on the 30K combine is $1500,00. Coincidence?
So, just by this little example we see that there is no risk taken on their side. And this is being conservative. Normally a newbie trader takes more than 12 months to get funded, if he/she gets funded at all. There is plenty of money coming in to mitigate all the "risk" they say they take.
Another stupid rule is the 45% winning thing. In 10 days period you simply cannot have 45% winning days! You either have 40% or 50%. But again, 45 looks good and much lower than 50, right?
Savius is exactly the same thing. Same business model. Even more difficult as it seems to be 10 CONTINUOUS days. I don't think you get to chose the days to trade.
So, people, if you think you are lucky, then go for it. You might as well buy a lottery ticket. How much will you have to spend before you win? Just open an account and make deposits every month. Practice and develop your trading for a year or so on sim and when you feel comfortable, switch to the real account. If you lose it, start all over again. At least you won't help sponsor those scammers. And its gonna be even easier and less stressful, as you wont have to meet those stupid annoying rules that make the traders life much more difficult.
Unfortunately people don't realise how they are being tricked, thinking it's all about the skills and all that, when in fact this is no different from online gambling.
You obviously have to develop your skills, but it wont matter much when you have to follow rules that are designed to work against you.
Always do your own research and trade well!
I'm just giving my 2 cents here on how this business model actually works, as I went through the process at TopStep ( which is absolutely the same kind of business as Savius, no matter what anyone says). So here is what I realized after being funded by TST.. I spent about 5 months worth of continuous combine fees (over $800,00) for about 8 months total. I failed it twice and managed to pass it twice. The first time I passed it, I had to do the FTP (funded trader prep), in which they add 2 other rules to be followed: You have 10 days to trade (you can chose those) and reach a profit of $750,00. Your winning percentage must be at least 45%. I failed that and went back to the combine. After another couple of months (paying the fees obviously) I passed it again and finally got funded. So, I had to follow those stupid rules again on the funded account, being positive after the 10th day and have at least 45% winning days.
Sounds pretty easy right? The problem with trading those first 10 days is that in such a short period of time, the outcome of your trading tends to be pretty random. If you take any successful trader's track record over the years and divide it by blocks of 10 days, you will see that many of those blocks will have a negative P&L, but the trader will still be profitable in the long term. You can even do a simulation of that on a computer. Drawdowns happen all the time and they don't have any specific time to start or end. But a successful trader will always be able to recover over time.
In the FTP and in the first 10 days trading live you don't have such a luxury of a drawdown. Even a little one will be hard to overcome, given that its gonna affect your psychology as well. It just adds more pressure on the trader. It makes trading much more difficult. You just cannot set a time limit for something that works with probabilities. There is only so much a trader can control.
They have the odds on their side you see, they are the Casino and we are the gamblers. They know all the probabilities of a trader being successful after those 10 days and they take advantage of that. The less people passing the test, the better.
I had a little chat with the CEO, Mr Patak, and he said basically I needed more screen time (did I laugh?) and I should sign up for another combine. Then I asked for a free first month of a new one, since I had already passed it twice, and he said the company takes all the risk and the free month of a continuous combine wouldn't apply in my case. The point is, is he really interested in funding traders? I don't think so.
And does the company takes all the risk? I am 100% sure they DON'T! And here is why: I spent over $800,00 on fees to pass the combine. I lost the company only $700,00 in those 10 days. So, $800 - $700 = $100,00 profit for them. Who actually lost money overall?? I think I was the one. Do the business lose any money with traders at all? Absolutely not. I've heard of traders taking a year or even many years to pass the combine. Let's say 12 months on average (being conservative). So, 12 times $ 130,00 (the 30K combine ) is $1560,00 in fees. The max drawdown if you get funded on the 30K combine is $1500,00. Coincidence?
So, just by this little example we see that there is no risk taken on their side. And this is being conservative. Normally a newbie trader takes more than 12 months to get funded, if he/she gets funded at all. There is plenty of money coming in to mitigate all the "risk" they say they take.
Another stupid rule is the 45% winning thing. In 10 days period you simply cannot have 45% winning days! You either have 40% or 50%. But again, 45 looks good and much lower than 50, right?
Savius is exactly the same thing. Same business model. Even more difficult as it seems to be 10 CONTINUOUS days. I don't think you get to chose the days to trade.
So, people, if you think you are lucky, then go for it. You might as well buy a lottery ticket. How much will you have to spend before you win? Just open an account and make deposits every month. Practice and develop your trading for a year or so on sim and when you feel comfortable, switch to the real account. If you lose it, start all over again. At least you won't help sponsor those scammers. And its gonna be even easier and less stressful, as you wont have to meet those stupid annoying rules that make the traders life much more difficult.
Unfortunately people don't realise how they are being tricked, thinking it's all about the skills and all that, when in fact this is no different from online gambling.
You obviously have to develop your skills, but it wont matter much when you have to follow rules that are designed to work against you.
Always do your own research and trade well!
