Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Can someone please explain to me how the firms actually benefit from providing "live sim" and offering the profits to the trader in real money?
Is this simply a matter of saving money on not having to fund the traders that blow up their sim accounts and passing the savings on to the profiting traders?
So, if that clause you've highlighted covers the situation being discussed above, does it follow that all the prop firms letting traders in similar circumstances not pay "professional" level data feeds are running some kind of fiddle, and CME either lets them get away with it, or doesn't know about it? Or is there some other explanation I've failed to appreciate (always possible)?
this is for live accounts. the CME does not charge $105/exchange/month for a SIM account.
this is why the live SIM account provided by Topsteptrader for their live funded traders does not charge any data fees.
this is also why Oneuptrader does not charge any data fees in their live accounts b/c they are known to keep their newly-funded live traders on a SIM account until they have proven profitability.
idk if you're deliberately trying to be obtuse but the point everyone here's been making is why you're the only funding company to charge $105/exchange/month on a live sim account when this is not being charged by the CME.
this is obviously why TST and OUT can offer free exchange fees on their live sim accounts. if, according to your logic, CME was charging these exchange fees for even livesim accounts, that would mean TST/OUT are taking a $420/month loss on each funded trader on livesim. that is clearly not true.
in case you're still confused, we're not talking about the SIM accounts in the Gauntlet or Gauntlet mini. we're referring to the livesim option you're currently offering those who've passed the Gauntlet mini and don't want to wait until prop firm setup is complete to move into a live (not livesim) account with real fills.
the fact is, you're just making excuses trying to make this out to be something outside of E2T's control by blaming the CME when the CME absolutely does not charge $105/exchange/month for a SIM account.
This year I took a break from trading for a few months, but CME data fees (Non-Professional) were still deducted from my live account. The following exchange I had with AMP Futures Support would indicate that the CME does charge for paper trading accounts. (Names have been redacted and I have no affiliation with Earn2Trade.)
I'm sorry, but I do have to reiterate here. The CME charges data fees for sim accounts as well. In fact, professionals are charged that rate on the Gauntlet programs too.
Earn2Trade www.earn2trade.com Become a Professional Trader. Decisions That Can Change Your Life Forever.
I think what's puzzling your current and prospective customers here, Orianna, is the undeniable reality that you're charging for something TopStep and OneUp aren't charging for.
I appreciate, of course, that you can't reasonably be expected to comment on other firms' policies in these circumstances ... just as I'm sure you appreciate that you have competitors who have evidently found a way of resolving this issue that you haven't found.
I accept that you have, as you put it, "already answered that question", but it's apparent to all concerned that you haven't answered it in a way that satisfies your customers and potential customers.
Maybe there's simply no more you can do about that, but that would be a shame (and clearly result in loss of potential business for you).
Obviously nobody's alleging for a moment that you're pocketing extra fees and not passing them on to CME, but why do you think this issue's turned into such a problem for E2T, when it clearly hasn't for so many of your competitors?
How do you know that the fee actually goes to the CME and not in the pocket of EtoT? Just curious because these types of firms seem to have different policies.
I was just clarifying/demonstrating that I'm casting no aspersions of impropriety at all, but also that this doesn't detract at all from the fact that what's being so repeatedly asked here is a perfectly legitimate and reasonable question that hasn't yet been answered to the satisfaction of E2T's customers and potential customers.
I'd be interested to hear Orianna's take on why it's turned into such a thorny issue for E2T when apparently it isn't at all for their competitors.
I understand your position. But apparently there's a disparity among these firms relating to this CME fee issue. I think you could resolve the issue yourself by contacting the CME and asking why some firms are exempt and EtoT is not. Should be a simple answer.
I still think a confirmation that the CME is actually receiving this fee is in order. There's a reason why your question isn't being addressed completely.