And regarding IBFX, I just heard they got fined by the NFA for like 250k. But at least the NFA okayed there back office system.

@Easy-EA: FXDD is in the midst of submitting their application to NFA… Is it compulsory fro all US broker to be registered with NFA?? I mean FXDD has been around for a long time now… why only now are they registering themselves with NFA?? Is there another new regulation governing NFA??

Yeah… with IBFX I have already open another sub account… which means difficult to effectively utilize my margins. I could have been pulling more profits with Cyborg if not for this $hitty regulations….

Thanks for your input guys…

From what I have read, your concerns have been shared by a lot of people in a similar positions since they were first announce around 3 months ago.

On our part, as EA authors/vendors, we have made sure that our own EAs comply with the anti-hedging regulations. The latest version of Winalot, for instance, now contains a switch whereby users can say whether their broker allows hedging or not. Although the performance is still good, it is not quite as profitable with the switched turned on for US users as it is for non-US users with the switch turned off.

That alone does not solve the other issues, however.

One other problem, as you correctly point out, is that it will no longer be possible to use two EAs trading the same currency symbol on the same account. To me, this is sheer stupidity as people might want to employ both a scalping strategy and a trending strategy together. Both strategies have their own merits and seek to achieve a different result. So why should this suddenly be a problem and why should they be denied the opportunity to do it? Who are the NFA seeking to protect exactly?

Also, the FIFO rule is going to be more problematic to implement and has been delayed now until the end of July. It involves MetaQuotes making a modification to at their client brokers side so that it will work. I presume the “fix” will only be implemented with those brokers who are affected.

From the feedback we have received from our userbase so far, it appears that most US brokers are unhappy about these changes. Many are advising their clients to switch their accounts to their UK branch. Others have discussed the option of moving client funds offshore so that they are unaffected by the NFA rules. From what I gather, Alpari US are a broker who do not allow their US clients to open UK accounts. Why not?

I have also heard or read that FXDD are not members of the NFA and are therefore unaffected by the changes. I am not a client of FXDD though, so am unable to confirm if this is the case or not.

The other suggestion I have heard is that brokers like IBFX allow a number of “sub” accounts to operate under the umbrella of the main acount. It may be worth exploring therefore if it is possible to hedge through different sub-accounts.

Otherwise, if the clients are unhappy, the brokers are unhappy and the EA vendors are unhappy it is difficult to know exactly who the winners are here. My suggestion, for what it’s worth, is to open up new non-US accounts.

Some of what I have said may simply re-iterate the concerns already raised by Casey, but I hope it helps.

In reality this is the matter of fact:

Hedging can be simulated by using two separate accounts. However, this method presents a greater risk of being margin-called, as the positions do not offset each other in the same account.
U got it? broker get twice the spread when we hedge in the future…..and chance to wipe out the accounts increase by 100%

But who cares? Who needs to trade in maroon land?

Next fu(k up rule there is just around the corner:
Leverage will be scaled down to max 1:100, most likely to 1:25
The end for most high profitable EAs !

Conclusion: NFA/broker- mafia kicks out mt4 and EA trading in USA
Solution: go to UK and AUS broker