can we start the ball rolling on sb firms and cfd firms giving them marks out of 10. spreads etc. also min size openings etc.
this was not my idea the suggestion was from jules and i think we should give it a try.

Thanks agin to all contributors...

A few more questions on the subject of CFD's/SB's spreads and Interest charged.. again..if anyone can help

Is my understanding correct that the spreads in CFD's are as 'close' OR the 'same' as spreads in spread bets, or is there always a difference even if I had 1 CFDa/c and 1 SB a/c with the same Broker...e.g CMC?

Also what is costs wise better ref to CFD a/c, a firm which charges 'Commission' on the execution or a Firm which charges Interest on a daily basis? do all firms charge same amount of % interest or does it differ between Brokerages and is this negotiable??

And while on the subject does the interest rate Charged, change with Monthly Interest rate changes?

or Is that totally another Ball game and bears No resemblance..sorry if that sounds stupid and Dohhh...but i'm learning and want to make sure I understand and there are no hidden surprises...


Many thanks if someone knows answers to these...

Aslo Croc do you know the best book on CFD trading in the UK?

I use Fins and hve no complaints other than those mentioned by Zoltar.

One very favorable thing they do quite often, to my surprise, is
that they execute stops with discretion.

If a price has hit your stop then turned favorable again they
often let the trade continue. Now THAT is good service.
I should add that it doesn't always happen that way but I can
say they have never stopped me out at aything other than the price
I've specified and I don't use guaranteed stops.

It could of course be that my piddling little trades wouldn't be
any big loss to them anyway but that would be cynical, wouldn't it?

Zoltar,re Fins, have you tried refreshing using the little 'refresh server'
icon? That often gets things rolling again.

I gave up on Fins some months ago because the web site was too flakey at that time. I would hope that they have it sorted by now.

The general rule is that when trying to catch small movements in share prices you use CFDs because they have narrower spreads. Dealers that charge commision usually have the tightest spreads and are favoured for this type of thing. If you are trying to catch larger price movements it is better to use spreadbetting. The larger spreads will nibble at winnings and increase losses, but there is no tax to pay on winnings and no paperwork for the taxman. If you try to trade small price movements using spreadbetting or some CFD companies you will be defeated by the spreads.

BobP some interesting points u have made..thank you...when you say nibble...

lets take BT for example...


BT SET PRICE shows:180.5-181 What is your definition of nibbling, my understanding would be to Buy (or go long CFD spread given maybe 181/181.5, sell at 186 or around that mark...?

For most tight spreaded FTSE stocks what would you say is correct/fair quote for (BT as example again) CFD spread given by Broker, using example above, would be a 'quarter' or 'half' point above quoted SETS price? I presume it would be a quarter, of course If I am not happy with spread I can just say..No..

I find nibbling risk high at this stage of trading, just my opinion, I know traders do that all the time, some very successfully I might add, need to gain a lot more experience to do that kind of trading...but I am learning, and want to be confident that trade I make is my best...at least a higher % of success, than failure..

Large price movemtns ur referring to the likes of volitile ups/down swings...(not wide spreads)

I've done a number of fantasy ones with good results overall.


Sorry to be a drag on a FRiday nite...!


Many Thanks always...

Jules99.

anybody got any comments on spreadex site or if they are using them what is thir opinion.
rgds
zarif

Hope you all had a good weekend.
Back in action for the week
good luck.

ps: any news on spreadex????

rgds
zarif

dow and footsie going southbound today before going north. can u suggest any levels. top and bottom
rgds
zarif


has anybody tried :
the indexking trade tips??

CANTOR INDEX SEEMS VERY GOOD. VERY HELPFUL STAFF FOR BEGINERS LIKE MYSELF. TIGHTISH SPREADS, GOOD WEBSITE. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?...

This is a great thread BTW...

Any body used IFX for trading CFD's/SB, I know they are owned by someone else or they have another name does anybody remember what?

Am I right in saying I'm the only one trading via telephone???

hey whats funny...??

Ta.

Jules99.

no- you are not the only one.
Spreadex have a live monitor on their site which is not in sync with the market and you have to ring them all the time.

IG index - the site went down-last week and had to deal by "dog and Bone"

rgds
zarif

no- you are not the only one.
Spreadex have a live monitor on their site which is not in sync with the market and you have to ring them all the time.

IG index - the site went down-last week and had to deal by "dog and Bone"

rgds
zarif

The dow was down and stagnant yesterday.
I think today it will see a retracement towards the 94hunderds levels.What are your views.???

rgds
zarif

how is your trades on the dow doing today????
rgds
zarif

jules99

Been away for a few days. The spreads of SB companies vary a lot from one company to another, and also depend on what you are trading. Obviously there is no point in trying to profit on a small (say) 1% change with a spread of 1% or more. Even with a 0.5% spead you lose a large chunk of your gains, or greatly boost losses. You stand a much better chance of success with the very tight spreads of CFDs, and it is worth paying tax on the profits, because you should actually make some profits.

If you are going for larger changes of perhaps 10% or more, a wide spread is still not good, but you can live with it. The larger changes can be due to trading volatile stocks or taking a medium to long term stance. The maths are the same either way. Although you lose slightly on the wider spreads, there is no tax to pay on SBing. This more than compensates for the losses on the wider spread. I do not do very short term trading, but those that do suggest that a broker charging commission gives very tight speads and is the best bet.

BobP,

Thanks for your comments...useful as always, I will go ahead with CFD's mind made up...may join the likes of CMC first, and try a few medium sized trades FTSE350 and take it from there...

Money management and decision making skills have a greater play if you are to suceed very well..

Zarif,
may join you down the line on the Dow/Ftse...would need to do my research first...that web site was interesting however, not sure If am experienced to comment as Not my area of expertise...would be interested if anyone follows such methodology..

Ta.

Jules.

Are we long on the dow today as i reckon we are nortbound today
rgds
zarif

Afternoon everyone:
An intersting article that i came across on my sorties in cyberspace.

Re: The 50% retracement article for the dow:

That level represents the half-way point between the all-time high of 11,722 reached by the Dow ($INDU: news, chart, profile) and its low last year of 7,286. The blue-chip average has been hovering around this level for several weeks now, closing modestly above it on some occasions and below it on others before ending Tuesday's action at 9,576.

As Jack Adamo of Jack Adamo's Insiders Plus newsletter put it recently: "According to Dow Theory, when a bear market rally makes up more than half the decline from the previous top, it is more likely to test the old high than the old low. Obviously then, that halfway mark is an important juncture."

Richard Russell, editor of Dow Theory Letters, adds: "I'm interested to see whether the Dow can pull up and away from 9,504, or whether 9,504 will act as a 'magnet,' and in the end be too much for the Dow to overcome."

I nevertheless have my reservations about this 50 percent retracement principle, for several reasons.

First, it's not clear that either Charles Dow, for whom the Theory is named, or William Peter Hamilton, who spelled out and interpreted the Theory in a series of Wall Street Journal editorials in the first three decades of the last century, ever mentioned this principle.

That's according to Bill James, a Sacramento-based investor and author who has devoted much of his life to studying the Dow Theory. James has been working on a book about the Dow Theory for 20 years, and not only has he not found any reference in Dow's or Hamilton's writings to such a principle, he believes that they would have "quickly discarded" it as being "too much in conflict" with the rest of their Theory.

Apparently, the 50 percent principle was instead introduced by E. George Schaefer, who published a newsletter in the middle years of the last century by the name of Dow Theory Trader.

On one level, of course, it shouldn't matter whether this principle is or isn't part of the Dow Theory. The key question is whether it is a helpful market-timing tool. And I'll get to that in a minute.

But it is important to be clear and precise about what any theory entails, for without that precision it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to judge its effectiveness in a scientific way. For example, if someone told you that the Dow Theory has a poor track record, you wouldn't know whether the Theory that was tracked included the 50 percent principle or not.

All in the interpretation

In any case, the key question is whether the 50 percent principle is effective. Answering this is not as straightforward as you might imagine, however. It depends crucially on how it is interpreted.

For example, Adamo's formulation of the 50 percent principle is true, but only trivially so. Even if the stock market's movements were entirely random, the 50 percent principle would still appear to be true.

After all, if I'm closer to the market's high than to its low, which would be the case once it has retraced 50 percent of the previous bear market, random volatility alone would make it more likely that the market sooner makes it back to that high before making it back to that low.

To study the effectiveness of the 50 percent retracement principle, I therefore measured the stock market's performance following periods in which it had retraced 50 percent of a previous decline. If the principle is in fact useful, then the market should have performed better following such periods than following other bear market periods when it had failed to retrace 50 percent of its decline.

Here's how I designed my study:

First, I identified the 18 major bull market tops that occurred between 1896, when the Dow was created, and today.

Then for each of these market tops, I identified the first date thereafter at which the market had declined by 10 percent. I examined all trade days from then until the market subsequently surpassed its previous top.

Next, I segregated all these dates into two categories. The first contained those on which the Dow Industrials had retraced at least 50 percent of the decline from its previous top; the second contained all others.

For all dates in both categories, I measured the Dow's performance over subsequent periods lasting three, six and 12 months.

What I found was that the market performed almost exactly the same regardless of whether the 50 percent retracement principle had been satisfied.

On average, over the three months following trade dates that satisfied the 50 percent principle, the Dow gained 1.0 percent. Over the three months following trade dates that did not satisfy that principle, the blue-chip barometer on average gained 1.3 percent.

Though this difference is not statistically significant, notice that the market actually performed better following periods in which the 50 percent principle was not satisfied.

Consider next the difference over the subsequent six months. On average following periods in which the principle was satisfied, the Dow gained an average of 2.4 percent, as compared to 2.7 percent following periods in which the principle wasn't satisfied. This again is not statistically significant.

And over the subsequent 12 months, the average gain was identical for dates in both categories: 6.1 percent.

To be sure, my particular formulation of the 50 percent principle is not the only way of interpreting it. But the results of my study suggest that it may not be as effective a market-timing tool as many consider it to be.

And that, in turn, suggests that the 9,504 level may not be all that significant after all.

where is everybody today?

Hopefully it is going to be a LONG LONG DAY tomorrow
rgds
zarif

Dow on a downer again after kodak news.
Are we on Shorts again today????

rgds
zarif