Why not set it on USGFX, same as seller?
-
Please try to select the correct prefix when making a new thread in this folder.
Discuss is for general discussions of a financial company or issues related to companies.
Info is for things like "Has anyone heard of Company X?" or "Is Company X legit or not?"
Compare is for things like "Which of these 2 (or more) companies is best?"
Searching is for things like "Help me pick a broker" or "What's the best VPS out there for trading?"
Problem is for reporting an issue with a company. Please don't just scream "CompanyX is a scam!" It is much more useful to say "I can't withdraw my money from Company X" or "Company Y is not honoring their refund guarantee" in the subject line.
Keep Problem discussions civil and lay out the facts of your case. Your goal should be to get your problem resolved or reported to the regulators, not to see how many insults you can put into the thread.More info coming soon.
Discuss BumbleBeeFX.com
- Thread starter Administrator
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bumblebeefx
General discussions of a financial company
Why not set it on USGFX, same as seller?
Patrichia
Private
- Messages
- 211
1wildhorse
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 434
there is a possible problem with this broker in that they do not allow scalping more than 20% of trades....
BluePanther
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 39
Last edited:
BluePanther
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 39
This is similar to the BrokerArbitrage (same strategy). Payment through PayPal or Skrill (No refund money).
BrokerArbitrage.com System by brokerarbitrage | Myfxbook
Broker Arbitrage | BrokerArbitrage.com reviews and ratings by Forex Peace Army
I wonder how long will be profitable and as clients to other brokers. Otherwise, we will all be millionaires
An astute observation. Thank you for providing this information. I too noticed the similarity in the trade lengths of 0s, though I am hoping this is something that will work. Hoping for the best (not sure if I should expect the worst).
...and only time will tell if widespread usage will detrimentally affect performance of the EA (Million Dollar Pips comes to my mind). Let us see.
Looking forward to BigT1's, FPA's, Navtex' (and others') tests.
BigT1
Sergeant Major
- Messages
- 951
DUE TO THE TYPICAL DELAYS INHERENT IN THE FPA MODERATION PROCESS COUPLED WITH THE DEMAND FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS EA,
I AM HEREBY POSTING THE CONTENT OF MY DRAFT PRELIMINARY REVIEW POST (SUBMITTED TO FPA YESTERDAY) HERE ON THIS DISCUSSION BOARD.
I DO SO WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THE FPA LEADERSHIP MAY WISH TO EDIT OR REMOVE IT ENTIRELY, AS THEY SEE FIT.
REMEMBER, I AM JUST ANOTHER FPA MEMBER VOLUNTEER WATCHDOG, AND NOTING ELSE.
=========================================================
Attention FPA Members and casual non-member readers.
Initial review: No-Rating; to be updated later.
BumbleBeeFx has recently exhibited extraordinary results on their V.1.2 test now underway on FPA, as you have undoubtedly noticed.
These initial results have generated some extreme interest in it, crashed the vendor's site, and otherwise raised the roof.
As a result, the FPA has begun working feverishly and diligently with this cooperative vendor (who is indeed asking a high price for his EA on a short trading history), to expedite an FPA
overseen independent validation of the model going forward; for all interested parties to inspect.
FPA initially intends to generate a singular, first-proof attempt using a reasonable, middle of the road VPS, plus a commonly available and competent commission ECN/STP broker with very
tight spreads; who is available to any client worldwide, and who is both NFA and FSA regulated.
Namely, ATC Brokers of California USA.
Uniquely, within the US ATC also offers a novel and completely legal back-office software interface that totally eliminates the need for an MT4 client to respect the NFA FIFO and No-Hedge regulations.
The aim here is to determine the practicality of reproducing an approximation of the vendor's
published results, as might be accomplished by a typical user; and to display them here for
open inspection.
Although the vendor's test appears legitimate, this model relies upon:
1 - An unproven Australian, thinly regulated broker acting as a Market-Maker, with standard MM
spreads and zero commission.
2 - An initially small account size ($500) that is no longer small, and will soon be large (if
past is prologue. . .)
3 - Uncertainty as to whether the EA's production shall result in an actual cash withdrawal.
Additionally,
4 - The EA is an extremely high-frequency trader that gorges heavily upon news events and
other gappy market events.
5 - BumbleBeeFx demands extremely low-latency input data for it's guidance system. Sudden
price movements of any kind is what triggers trades in the algorithmically anticipated
direction before others can come to understand the imminent movement.
Very cool, if you have good data and can act instantaneously; very dangerous, if you do not or
cannot.
As a result, there is a very high probability that the statistical variations between typical
users will be quite wide. This means that few users will actually be able to report they have
replicated the posted results; and many will have wide deviations from trade-to-trade against
the FPA test report.
For those with weak infrastructure, long latency, and persistently poor broker executions;
those results will likely underperform the test results badly. They could be negative or
fatal even though positive results may be posted here.
Your results cannot and will not be due to any fault with the FPA, nor even of the vendor!
You just have to understand that driving a Bugatti at 210 mph on a race track is not the same
as a family jaunt in the Prius on a country road some sunny Sunday afternoon.
Please consider your skill set, your equipment, your location, your connection, your backups,
your willingness to confront and feed a lion on his terms, before you plunk down your $1 Grand for it,
and lose your other $9 Grand to it.
I will attempt to do that for you first.
If I survive (the mediocrity that I am), there may be hope for you too!
Stay tuned.
AI
I AM HEREBY POSTING THE CONTENT OF MY DRAFT PRELIMINARY REVIEW POST (SUBMITTED TO FPA YESTERDAY) HERE ON THIS DISCUSSION BOARD.
I DO SO WITH THE CAVEAT THAT THE FPA LEADERSHIP MAY WISH TO EDIT OR REMOVE IT ENTIRELY, AS THEY SEE FIT.
REMEMBER, I AM JUST ANOTHER FPA MEMBER VOLUNTEER WATCHDOG, AND NOTING ELSE.
=========================================================
Attention FPA Members and casual non-member readers.
Initial review: No-Rating; to be updated later.
BumbleBeeFx has recently exhibited extraordinary results on their V.1.2 test now underway on FPA, as you have undoubtedly noticed.
These initial results have generated some extreme interest in it, crashed the vendor's site, and otherwise raised the roof.
As a result, the FPA has begun working feverishly and diligently with this cooperative vendor (who is indeed asking a high price for his EA on a short trading history), to expedite an FPA
overseen independent validation of the model going forward; for all interested parties to inspect.
FPA initially intends to generate a singular, first-proof attempt using a reasonable, middle of the road VPS, plus a commonly available and competent commission ECN/STP broker with very
tight spreads; who is available to any client worldwide, and who is both NFA and FSA regulated.
Namely, ATC Brokers of California USA.
Uniquely, within the US ATC also offers a novel and completely legal back-office software interface that totally eliminates the need for an MT4 client to respect the NFA FIFO and No-Hedge regulations.
The aim here is to determine the practicality of reproducing an approximation of the vendor's
published results, as might be accomplished by a typical user; and to display them here for
open inspection.
Although the vendor's test appears legitimate, this model relies upon:
1 - An unproven Australian, thinly regulated broker acting as a Market-Maker, with standard MM
spreads and zero commission.
2 - An initially small account size ($500) that is no longer small, and will soon be large (if
past is prologue. . .)
3 - Uncertainty as to whether the EA's production shall result in an actual cash withdrawal.
Additionally,
4 - The EA is an extremely high-frequency trader that gorges heavily upon news events and
other gappy market events.
5 - BumbleBeeFx demands extremely low-latency input data for it's guidance system. Sudden
price movements of any kind is what triggers trades in the algorithmically anticipated
direction before others can come to understand the imminent movement.
Very cool, if you have good data and can act instantaneously; very dangerous, if you do not or
cannot.
As a result, there is a very high probability that the statistical variations between typical
users will be quite wide. This means that few users will actually be able to report they have
replicated the posted results; and many will have wide deviations from trade-to-trade against
the FPA test report.
For those with weak infrastructure, long latency, and persistently poor broker executions;
those results will likely underperform the test results badly. They could be negative or
fatal even though positive results may be posted here.
Your results cannot and will not be due to any fault with the FPA, nor even of the vendor!
You just have to understand that driving a Bugatti at 210 mph on a race track is not the same
as a family jaunt in the Prius on a country road some sunny Sunday afternoon.
Please consider your skill set, your equipment, your location, your connection, your backups,
your willingness to confront and feed a lion on his terms, before you plunk down your $1 Grand for it,
and lose your other $9 Grand to it.
I will attempt to do that for you first.
If I survive (the mediocrity that I am), there may be hope for you too!
Stay tuned.
AI
Last edited:
1wildhorse
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 434
all i can confirm at this point is that i have been running the ea for just over 2 days now and it has nearly quadrupled the account in that time.however i share BigT1's concerns that this is with an australian broker who after spending some time in live chat revealed that they only allow 20% of all trades to be considered to be 'scalping',in spite of what USGfx Forex Broker, USGfx Review, USGfx Information and USGfx | Forex MetaTrader Indicators both say that scalping is allowed.so with such a large volume of trades being carried out daily it would be difficult to place a large enough amount of trades to counteract the very good work done by the ea with this particular broker.i believe this is what alex was working on yesterday(which i commented upon)-the 1 lot trades using a higher timeframe in order to circumvent these 'rules'.the results from trading the market yesterday were inconclusive(too small a sample size),although the ea still made approx $1000 using a substantially reduced lotsize(1 lot per trade).a successive run of 9 losing trades were seen during this process.
so i certainly share his concerns on this particular point(the broker in question)
so i certainly share his concerns on this particular point(the broker in question)
1wildhorse
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 434
and of course the obvious is that you could make a gazillion dollars,but can you actually get your hands on it?otherwise its just monopoly money!
Are you also running the EA on USGFX?
1wildhorse
Private, 1st Class
- Messages
- 434
yes,and thats the one thats making the money.
Similar threads
Discuss
TechBerry.online
