FxStay - poor risk managment and no evidence to back up other claims
I am a trader and an investor. Unlike many gullible investors, I prefer to perform due diligence on any potential investment in order to avoid putting my money with either scammers or incompetent companies. A critical part of due diligence is verifying the claims from the company that wants me to invest.
Anyone putting money under someone else's control without performing due diligence is just begging to be scammed. For some reason, you don't even seem to understand the concept of due diligence, or is it just that you don't want people to bother performing due diligence?
Repetition of "trust us" doesn't make FxStay trustworthy. Evidence proving claims is all that matters.
1- all managed accounts open by investors and only investors can do withdrawal .. all accounts are segregated
2- all accounts get 20% bonus [ for limited time ]
Segregation and preventing 3rd party withdrawals are both functions of the broker selected and has nothing to do with FxStay. The problem is that you already claimed to be able to deposit cash (not a bonus) directly into a trader's account. This appears to violation AML rules against 3rd party deposits. If there is a simple bonus, that again is a function of the broker.
3- we guarantee loss up to $100k
You have failed again and again to explain where the $100k compensation for clients will come from. Do you have that money sitting in an escrow account somewhere? If 10 people sign up tomorrow with $100k accounts, will you immediately add $1 million to that escrow account?
I've watched the claims of account management companies like yours for years now. So far, all claims of insuring losses turned out to be lies. Amazingly, not one manager yet has managed to clearly and convincingly provide details of where the compensation money will come from.
I can only conclude that your claims are 100% false. I believe that if a client did sustain a large loss, the real "insurance" would amount to nothing more than either endless delays and/or a promise to "trade it back".
If such a guarantee against loss was real, a proper explanation of how it worked would be a valuable selling tool. A company would have to be run by idiots to really have such a function and not be able to explain it the first time someone asks.
4- we trade with safe risk
I wish you did. Unfortunately, 5 old screenshots (3 heavily edited) only covering a small amount of trading days provides nowhere near the amount of evidence any investor would need to be certain that this a claim of good risk management is true.
What those screenshots do show is that your company trades without hard stoplosses. A loss of internet connection at an inopportune time could lead to the inability to close trades during a sudden move against client positions. Some trades are held over weekends, meaning a price gap in the wrong direction could seriously impact clients.
Further, one of the accounts shows 5000 going in, and the biggest loss is $270.22. Do you call blowing 5% of the initial investment on a single trade good risk management? That trade also shows a negative swap of $29.23 and the trade was held from June 11 until June 27th. This looks to me like a simple case of a trader being unwilling to close losing trades. All the larger losses on that image show the same pattern - open on the 11th, close on the 27th with large losses enhanced by negative swaps. Total damage for trades closed on the 27th comes to over $850.
Worse, look at the opening times of all those trades. HUGE numbers of trades opened very quickly. Then trades that go into profit are closed and losing trades are allowed to run. It looks like the total risk to the account from having so many SL-free trades opened at the same time was very large.
I do see that all the trades on that page do sum up to a profit, but the way those losses were racked up clearly shows little or no attempt at risk management. Too bad - if the trader had used real risk management, the losses would have been smaller and the profits would have been larger.
I'm attaching a copy so that you can't later swap out the file on your server and deny it.
5- we just get money if we make profit and no hidden fee
This is good, but it would be better if several your websites didn't also include IB links to at least one broker. Clients who sign up from such a link could be paying you a commission whether the account makes or loses money.
just want to show all brokers as scam one
Two points:
1. FxStay is an account management company, not a broker, even though one of your other websites (TopForexBroker.com) lists FxStay as being a broker.
2. I regularly point out scam and potential scams to try to protect traders. I don't call companies a scam for no reason. I gave you every opportunity to show that your claims about FxStay were true and even promised to personally invest and endorse you if you could prove them. You failed miserably to provide any proof other than repetitively stating that your claims were real.
So, if I've seen number proven managed accounts scams that ripped off lots and lots of money from traders making claims nearly identical to yours, and all those companies also failed to back up their claims with simple evidence (while saying things like "trust us, we've been in business a long time"), why exactly should anyone accept any of your claims with no proper evidence?
As long as your answers remain the same, my advice remains the same:
I believe that the claims of covering losses up to $100,000 are completely a lie designed to lure in unwary investors. Further, some of the limited trading records available for viewing on FxStay's website show trading methodologies that make the kind of mistakes I would expect of an amateur, not from a professional forex account manager.
I warn all traders not to use FxStay to manage accounts.
