Forum Forexroasted

check whether the change applies to your existing funded account or only to new signups. firms can change terms for future customers freely, thats normal. changing the split on traders already funded under a stated deal is far more questionable and depends on what the terms you agreed to said about their right to amend. read your original agreements clause on changes, that determines whether this is allowed or a breach of the deal you accepted.

yes, and more brokers entertain it than people assume, you just have to actually ask with numbers. i emailed my account manager with my monthly traded volume and current commission cost and asked for a volume-based rate. they offered a tiered rebate that meaningfully cut my costs. the worst case was a no. high volume is leverage in that conversation and most traders never use it.

thinking of just copying a "top trader" instead of trading myself. the profiles show like +200% but something feels off. whats the catch with copy trading, surely if it was that easy everyone would be rich

i'd argue ultrawide 34-38 inch single monitor beats dual smaller monitors. continuous screen real estate without bezels, single mouse cursor, scales better. depends on personal preference but worth considering before committing to dual.

the framing you set determines everything. always share the reasoning and the risk, never just the entry, and explicitly tell people not to copy, that youre showing your process so they can build theirs. the moment you post bare entries without the why, you become a signal feed whether you meant to or not. reasoning attached, copying discouraged, results shown both ways, that keeps it collaborative.

i'll defend pure trend following. yes you miss the range periods but the few major trends per year capture most of your annual P&L. trying to range trade in the dead times is busy work that adds risk without commensurate reward. patience is the strategy.

the technique that works for me: before every trade, write down 'why this trade might be wrong' for 2 minutes. mandatory. forces my brain to actually generate counter-arguments. about 30% of the time, doing this exercise makes me skip the trade. of the trades i do take after, win rate is significantly higher. takes 2 mins, saves real money.

had the identical realisation at my own six month review. the aggressive trades were emotionally loud and financially quiet, the boring base hits were emotionally invisible and financially everything. now i deliberately protect the boring trades and treat the urge to take a big aggressive one as a yellow flag. your recap is the moment a lot of traders either grow up or ignore the data and stay stuck. glad youre in the first group.

the troll is needling but theres truth, some traders run a linux vps with the terminal under wine specifically to escape the windows update reboot cycle. its more setup and not for everyone. for most people, locking down windows update plus auto-relaunch is the pragmatic fix without learning a new os. pick your battle.

a few years in and im noticing burnout creeping, the constant decision-making, the emotional swings, the screen time. i can still trade well but i feel the wear. for those whove lasted many years, how do you manage longevity and avoid burning out of a career that has no off switch by default?

the troll is right that they are technically disclosed, the failure is people not reading. but some are genuinely written to be easy to misread, like consistency rules phrased vaguely. the defence is the same either way: before paying, read the full rules and write down in your own words exactly how drawdown, consistency, trading days and news rules each work. if you cant restate a rule plainly, you dont understand it well enough to trade under it.

percentage based, 0.5-1% risk per trade. the compounding upside on winning periods + automatic risk reduction during losing periods is mathematically optimal long-term. fixed lot has psychological appeal (more predictable) but mathematically inferior for account growth.

trailing drawdown calculated on peak equity got me early. i was up nicely, gave some back on a normal pullback, and breached a limit that had silently followed my high-water mark up. a static drawdown from starting balance is far more forgiving than one that trails your peak. read exactly how drawdown is measured before anything else, its the rule that fails the most accounts that were actually trading fine.

i run two, occasionally three. one primary where most capital and trading sits, and a fully funded backup at a different regulated broker so if the primary has a withdrawal issue or downtime i can keep trading and im not held hostage. more than three is just admin overhead for me with no added safety. two is the sweet spot of redundancy without sprawl.

ive been running 4 accounts for 2 years. my approach: same core strategy across all, but slightly different parameters to deal with each firm's specific rules. ftmo gets standard, alpha gets a slightly less aggressive version to fit their consistency rules, blueguardian gets a tighter daily DD version. one trading desk, three rule-adapted versions.

spent a year in a few. the honest verdict: a good room with one experienced trader narrating their reasoning is genuinely educational, you learn how they think in real time. but most rooms devolve into exactly the herd you fear, everyone copying calls without understanding them, then panicking in unison when it goes wrong. the value is in the reasoning being explained, not the calls being copied.

its not dead, its evolved. classical breakout is dead. but the concept of trading the volatility expansion at session opens is still profitable with the right adjustments. claiming the entire concept is dead because the simplest version no longer works is too broad a claim.

yes if you edit simultaneously you can get conflict copies. realistically you edit on one machine at a time so its rarely an issue, but the habit that saves you is: make changes in one place, let it sync, then open the others. treat one machine as the source of truth and the rest as read-only mirrors.

i symlink the relevant folders (MQL5/Indicators, templates, profiles) to a synced cloud folder. set it once per machine and every change propagates automatically. the trick is closing the terminal before it picks up changes, otherwise mt5 caches and overwrites on exit. works flawlessly once you respect that.

every beginner course says 'aim for 1:3 risk reward minimum, even if your win rate is 40% you'll be profitable'. on paper the math is clean.

in reality on my last 200 trades my actual realized R per trade is 1:1.4. some big winners hit 1:3 or 1:4 but plenty close at 1:1.5 because the move slows or reverses. and forcing trades to run to 1:3 means leaving a lot of 1:2 winners turn into break-evens.

curious if anyone here actually realizes 1:3+ consistently in real trading, not in cherry-picked screenshots. what makes it possible?