Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT

20 year FOREX veteran. Brokers, trading, Prop Firms.
Previously of @MyForexFunds 1.0 and @ATFunded . Now Senior advisor to @MyForexFunds 2.0

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

Lost for words, just saw someone comparing their favorite prop to pump fun in a positive light.
Nope... too much internet for today.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@elgamonal7 yes i think so. If the net PL beats the total fees its profitable.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

On the A-book stuff there is a something that people are missing. I think Gandalf might have eluded to it but im tired and cant go digging it up.

You can a-book prop traders, but the prop firm itself lives on net PL of the entire Abook, not the trader individually. So you could have 100k payouts and 20k PL on the abook, with a shortfall of 80k (eval fees/other revenue you might have make up the difference).

With the massive churn, without a pass rate figure its hard to quantify it, but if some of the churn figures are real, your net PL on a-book would be negative depending on the pass rate. For the instant account, there is no risk, you can a-book them and fees = revenue.

What bothered me the most about this time line and I did promise others I wouldn't speak more about it but just this once I will due to your great video - You cannot make a market and be a-book at the same time, you are basically just sending orders to a bucket somewhere else. For me that was a massive trigger, it felt a bit offensive to my soul but I gave up talking about it because some special cryptobros tried to bro science me.

[Arjo @arjoio]

For all associated with Vest, you might want to double check their founder’s claims:

https://t.co/4xSdIjZlLV

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

“We need no spreads”. Friend you need to take a nap.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@FinchFX1 if you choose old program you can but it wont be for sale afterwards.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

Another question. Where does the DD upgrade go? Is it the intern dd or the partner DD? Its the partner DD you are upgrading and can upgrade to 100% utilizing the points system.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@FinchFX1 There will be another email going out to allow the choice, we had a small issue with the mailing system earlier they are working on it now.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@FinchFX1 I see 3 accounts, 2 300k and 1 x 200k. So I am not sure what is going on but translate might be affecting it. I have told them to reach out to you to communicate and resolve.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@FinchFX1 case ID please.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@jamal2199fx @Market_Emotions @QuantroCapital @salmanmunir96

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

Eventually what will happen is the industry will shift. Because the serial churners who aren't gamifying the props will drop out (the meat to pay the churners) and the churners will start getting banned.

Every system is gamifyable, you just have to build one that works for both parties and then everyone can co-exist. At some point in the next 2 yrs i suspect that the amount of gamified flow in prop will surpass 60% so then its just about managing gamified flow and not traders. Identifying this early will help a business exist in the future.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@UnBunthoeurn if your account is 100k, and you are up to 103000 at 00:00 with 3000 floating and the next day your account goes 99910, it will breach if you go down 3% of the starting equity (in the challenge specifically). In funded partner status there is no daily dd.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

Someone asked about accelerated. Accelerated the max DD and weekend hold are the only rules. The rest you do whatever you like. Gap risk applies unfortunately there - again working on that as well. But conditionlessly take rewards when you want, scale account size from points and just enjoy.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

No, its equity of the day, not trailing. Daily is calculated by the highest value of balance/equity at 00:01 server time. One could argue that the daily dd is EOD trailing but thats what daily balance DD is as well, trailing typically refers to the two dd figures following the account, so overall and equity moving at end of day or based on equity.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

sounds like its from a person in futures if its real, i suspect some of the perps behavior matches it as well. The taking payout immediately thing only lowers average payout rates and resets the dd values so statistically isn't beneficial to the user unless there are other trap rails (consistency etc) there to make the account enter the hamster wheel of no payouts.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@Alifxp1122 sunday open, the reason is the gap risk.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

Regarding weekend holding.

We have a solution, but not for XAU, US30 and US100 US500.

Some of you who provided early feedback, I want your feedback on this. Weekend hold allowed excluding those 4 symbols Y/N?

A reminder of the reason behind the rule. If 500 traders have 1 lot long XAU, the company collectively (this is prop after all) has 500 lots of long risk on XAU.
If the market gaps down $150 friday to sunday, it will ignore your stops (you will lose way more than your stop loss) and exit on first available price which for 500 lots, isn't even the first tick.

If you calculate the dollar value of $150 gap against 500 lots, its self explanitory on the why.
(I think the total loss is around 4.5m? correct me if I am wrong). 500 Prop accounts with 4.5m risk (september was the last gap of that size).

Another option that could be made available but I don't think people will like it, is to have the position close on friday on a "swing account" type and reopen on sunday morning minus any fees so the gap (loss or win) is discounted but you are in your position still, we will take the hit on the fees to make sure the gap is only discounted but the Profit or loss from the gap wont be there. This would require some technical work on our end but is doable.

*THESE ARE NOT DECISIONS, JUST DISCUSSION FOR NOW TO FINALIZE OPTIONS*

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

You need to make the variables fit both parties and control it via pass rate. If you are using data driven edge against props to get payouts, it can be fine so long as the pass rate is not high, the purchase to payout ratio can be lobsided to the trader, but for a Lanto case for example, the prop can't do anything but take it on the chin. However, if the failure rate is high in the challenge as opposed to on funded, even at a Lanto ratio its do-able.

Source: new MFF model is built around this, to avoid having to chase the behavior around all day.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@BrettSimba Do we have a real one we can compare to for scale?

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

You have answered most of your questions yourself by having the wrong assumption regarding the trade execution. The model is no conflict. That means, if you are in the partner status, we are taking your trade data to our partner company and then using it in the market. Our risk in this case, is not from the payouts its from the herd loss (if users are net long and the gap is down, we lose our shirt).

7.5m is worse than 4.5 so it just makes it worse.

The argument could be that it should be allowed in the challenge, but what is the point of that if you can't use it in the funded?

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@QewteeTrades its something that is potentially a solution

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

yes but he had them fit. If yuo are going to play counter attacking football you gotta be super fit, so it worked in carricks favor, but this year they are unfit, carricks tactics were awful last year, some luck and really fit team it worked, now they teams know the tactics and they aren't fit.... hes an awful manager. Amazing player and a legend but not a manager. But I would sack wilcox first.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

Haven't been replying because I was watching the abysmal manchester united side lose again :(

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

@sherrybossgh so long as you keep the buffer, yes.

[Josh Dentrinos - NOT SUPPORT @PropJoshD]

A few folks seem to be a little confused about partner status.

The 2% doesn't follow you - its static. If you have an account and you make 5% on the first trade, you can risk that 5%, its yours to do w/e you want with it. There is no daily drawdown or trailing or floating margin rules or risk per trade rules or any of that stuff.

In partner status you decide what you want to do not us.