FPA Introduces Managed Forex Accounts Performance Testing

Status
Not open for further replies.
A critic to FPA

To determine someone as account manager, it takes many years & their consistency trading per month & per year should be good enough. So, at least it takes the results of Managed Account performance which has been running a minimum of 1 year, even better if had managed account over 3 years with no history of MC / bankrupt.

Really shocking to me if the 'Forex Peace Army', (which protects traders from bad brokers),,,, featuring more & more new Managed Account which only run 1-2 months.

There's even an Account Manager that started trading from 2010, but the account not updated for 2 years & is still displaying old trade record in his web (how his trading progress until today?)

If situation continues like this, in next time the Forex Peace Army will turned into a HYIP forum, or indirectly will entrap potential investors.

As we all know,,,, forex is not a money game, there are some investors' money to be deposited and Forex Peace Army should provide guidance to investors to determine a good & qualified Managed Account.

Can Forex Peace Army showing/featuring only quality & qualified account manager?
 
Last edited:
I don't think the FPA should be responsible for determining whether or not a fund manager is quality or qualified, just like they don't tell us which EA's or signal services are the best. They simply display the results that they capture directly from the trading accounts and show them to us. It's our job to do due diligence and make wise investment decisions. One of your qualifications is that they should be operating for more than 1 year, but someone else may be satisfied with a 9-month track record. We all have different goals and minimum requirements we look for when selecting strategies or investment options.

Scott
 
I agree that 'Forex Peace Army' is not directly associated with any managed account here, because they are from different institutions.
But if we look at the FPA slogan that anti scammer, FPA must choose qualified account manager to be reviewed.

why I can write like above? ... if we see from the first page, 90% of the account manager is bankrupt, its web-close down, being inspected, although they only running about 1-2 years .... some are not showing performance track record,,,, some showing only a demo account (what kind of account manager who manage investor money in a demo account?)

Only 1 or 2 Account Manager who dared to show its trading statement transparently.

And what should be attention here,,,, on most of the Account Manager review, there are investors who already become victims (and then web closed-down)

My point is, everyone has a right to become account manager, and the mission of 'Forex Peace Army' here (as an anti-scammer) is to publish only filtered qualified account manager (I hope).


Just remember,,, Not all account manager have experience to trade,,,,, and not all investors are smart to read trading statement & choosing account manager.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
If a company ran a bunch of small accounts using different strategies for 3 years, they could submit the best of the best to the FPA for performance testing.

Personally, I'd be happier if they all started with brand new accounts. Then we can watch and see how those stack up against any prior claims of great performance. Check the number of managed accounts that went down in flames while being tested.

If all managed accounts companies had to provide a 3 year track record in order to not be considered a scam, how would any new managed accounts company ever get started?
 
If a company ran a bunch of small accounts using different strategies for 3 years, they could submit the best of the best to the FPA for performance testing.

Yes, this is what i mean. It should be a sub-thread contain long lasting Managed Account.
coz i believe if the Account Manager who able to survive from "cruel market" at least 1-2 year, then he really can handle forex market & not easily sacrificing investor money (although bangkrupt risk is always remain, but in small probability).

Personally, I'd be happier if they all started with brand new accounts. Then we can watch and see how those stack up against any prior claims of great performance. Check the number of managed accounts that went down in flames while being tested.

If all managed accounts companies had to provide a 3 year track record in order to not be considered a scam, how would any new managed accounts company ever get started?

Every kind company is same, there always be first time condition. Most big company are "start from scratch"...... so in "Managed Account" business and other financial company, they have to proof their trading record before declare themself as Account Manager.

So, maybe FPA no need to introduce new Account Manager, but let the Forex Asset Managers And Currency Market Managed Accounts Reviews still there, because every person have rights to trade and or create PAMM/MAM.

or..
FPA can create separate thread,,,,,, 1 thread for introducing new released Managed Account with Big 'risk warning' to investor,,,,,,, another thread is for long lasting (qualified) MA which survive more than 1-2 year for being reviewed & their trading statement still updated until current time today (all Must have myfxbook or FXStat or Mt4i,,, can't be fake report using these statement publisher).


Someday we will see the 'real' Account Manager, and the number would be much less than others.
 
Signals, EA, Managed. The FPA's Performance Tests have shown many claims of sustainable profitability are fake. The FPA used to allow demos for Signals and Managed Accounts. That ended some time back. EAs that fail can now only be restarted on live accounts.

There's no danger of any HYIP ever getting into Performance Testing. I've never heard of any HYIP that had a live accounts anywhere. If one did, it would only take a few days of results to show how the performance can't match the claims.

Performance Tests show how long each test has been running. A test with over a year of history is a more reliable indicator than one only a week old. Most people should understand this.

The FPA warns everyone to be careful dealing with any forex company. The longevity of a company is one factor to consider. It's not the only one. Crown Forex was well established and well respected before it went broke. The fall of Crown Forex is one big reason why the FPA never endorses companies.

Performance Testing is a tool for narrowing down a search for EAs, Signals, and Managed Accounts. The reviews are another tool. None of these tools are perfect, but it's better to use them than blindly believing anything a company posts on its own website.

I'm surprised Pharaoh held back on posting links to his articles about managed accounts. Both of them pre-date the launch of the Performance Testing program. You can find them here...

https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/fore...959-ponzi-schemes-hyips-free-money-traps.html

https://www.forexpeacearmy.com/fore...ose-all-your-money-managed-forex-account.html

Widy, if you want to start a new thread about your methods of weeding out bad account managers, General Forex Talk or Forex Articles would be a good place for it. I'd like to keep this thread primarily for dealing with announcing new PTs on Managed Accounts.
 
Last edited:
One new Managed Account test has joined the fray...

Solid Invest Fx by SolidFxInvest.com

Previously, Solid Fx Invest had a live test running on an EA. It looks like the company is redirecting more towards managed accounts. I want to thank them for volunteering. I wish them the best of luck and happy trading.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top