Showing posts with label forex. Show all posts
Showing posts with label forex. Show all posts

Thursday, August 25, 2016

"Central Banks Now Own $25 Trillion Of Financial Assets"

With 85% of Wall Street telling Citi they expect a "dovish hike signal" from Yellen tomorrow, which means a polite request for another BTFD opportunity, even if as BofA says "expectations for a dovish Fed are coinciding with macro strength in the US (most obviously in housing & consumer spending) as well as highest level of wage inflation since Jan’10"...
... here is a quick reminder of where we currently stand from BofA's Michael Hartnett, from a brief note titled The Liquidity Supernova & the "Keynesian Put."
* * *
Risk assets are now supported by the new ”Keynesian Put”, the expectation that fiscal measures will be deployed to combat any renewed weakness in the economy/markets (independently of any larger political projects). But asset prices remain primarily supported by excess monetary abundance across the world:
  1. There have been 667 interest rate cuts by global central banks since Lehman;
  2. G7 central bank governors Yellen, Kuroda, Draghi, Carney & Poloz have been in their current posts for a collective 17 years, yet only one (Yellen in Dec’15) has actually hiked interest rates during this time;
  3. Central banks own $25tn of financial assets (a sum larger than GDP of US + Japan, and up $12tn since Lehman);
  4. There are currently $12.3tn of negative yielding global bonds (28% of total);
  5. There is currently $8tn of negative yielding sovereign debt (54% of total).
Do not expect any unwind of this $25 trillion in risk asset support to be unwound any time soon, or perhaps ever, or else...
The Crab Nebula supernova

YOUR POCKET GUIDE TO BE A FOREX GENIUS - SPLITTING PENNIES


Tuesday, June 2, 2015

90 days commission free with Tradestation


Open an account for US Citizens and non-US citizens with Tradestation and get 90 days commission free trading!



Only with Elite E Services

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

4 C’s That Could Change The Financial World As We Know It, Again

Those 4 C’s are: Confirmation, Crisis, Contagion, Catastrophe.
What type of confirmation could send the financial markets into such turmoil it could rock the very bastions of finance as we now know it?
First: Scotland votes yes to leave the U.K. If this turns out to be so, it could send shock-waves throughout the markets that run the world. i.e., Forex or World currencies.
No one with any financial acumen can look seriously at the markets as they stand at the time of this writing, and seriously argue the markets are prepared for such a resolution happening this Thursday.
If Scotland truly does vote Yes and confirms independence from the U.K. the initial shock-waves in my opinion that will hit the markets will be akin to the video we’ve all seen 1000 times when a nuclear device is unleashed with a house being obliterated. Or, the one where trees are bent over near flat to then reverse back the same.
In my humble opinion this could be a metaphor of what could take place. The reason is simple: By proof of the markets as they stand today, it is proof prima facie that everyone (especially so-called “smart crowd”) thinks it won’t happen. And the odds via polling alone show it to be the equivalent of a coin toss!
If this happens it will also confirm something just as real, and quite possibly far more instructive: With both a Federal Reserve meeting being held just days prior to such an event, the language out of this meeting could not be more important.
If it’s some revised boilerplate “till conditions improve, extended period, blah, blah, blah” based press release and conference, it will again confirm what many believed from the start, The Fed is both deaf, blind, and ill prepared to handle what might be an event such as this. An event that has the potential to make the crisis of 2008 the equivalent of a firecracker as opposed to what might be unleashed if Scotland does indeed secede.
The ramifications are truly unknown, unquantifiable, and what might be worse – unmanageable.
Then we move to crisis.
Just how does the Federal Reserve handle such a dilemma of this scale? I use the word “scale” for good reason. As many may know the Forex markets dwarf what the lovingly referred to as “mom and pop investor” believe it to be.
The saving of the “stock market” (aka the Equity Markets) in 2008 vs a Forex market crisis is the equivalent of bailing out a local bingo hall as compared to dealing with such a crisis on the scale of Las Vegas casino.
If the Forex market suddenly gets rocked with a clear fundamental breakdown and breakup of everything now known as the E.U. Along with all the tentacle entangled carry trades? Crisis might be an understatement.
Contagion across the Forex exchanges will not only wreak havoc from within it will also spread directly to the Bond markets. (which many don’t realize is also considerably larger themselves than the equity markets)
Such sweeping turmoil will most assuredly plunge the equity markets themselves into complete and utter chaos as money managers, market makers, margin executives and more decree: “Sell Everything, Close Everything, Now!”
What chaos might also be unleashed as the High Frequency Trading (HFT) algos are set loose selling anything and everything into a market where it’s suddenly revealed via news reading computers that the jig is up?
Or, what no one (and I mean no one!) thought possible till this week. What if this was the week HFT decides to not skirt the laws, but to now – obey them?! i.e., CME Rule 575 as explained by ZeroHedge: These Kinds Of Market-Rigging “Practices” Will No Longer Be Allowed On The CME
This could make the current Ebola crisis and concerns about the speed and severity of contagion look like the sniffles in a kindergarten class.
The panic, fear, mistrust, alienation, ___________(fill in the blank) that holders of what once believed were liquid assets on their books will find out rather quickly nothing runs quicker down the drain than paper gains and wealth.
If all this plays out, what will follow will be a blow to the IPO market and all it has morphed into these last few years with “free money.” So much so that one will think they actually saw Thor’s Hammer. Alibaba™ stands to be “the” poster child for top ticking headlines like never before.
Friday their stock hits the market in what has been touted as one of the most sought after and highly demanded offerings. So much so that they were able to wrap their road show early.
All this in an era of low if not non-existent GDP figures of recent memory. Along with real unemployment, and other metrics screaming recession, however these are adjusted, tweaked or adulterated so much so – it would make a vocal harmonizer jealous.
If Alibaba finds itself trying to release an IPO in this potential melee it will have ramification not only for its own offering, but for every single current high flyer in the markets from now until who knows when. The issue is not just if this happens, but what happens for everything else -if?
A catastrophe is quite possibly in the making. But it is still all in the hands of nothing more than the odds in a flip of a coin. We’ll know more Thursday when Scotland votes. Until then what we truly know is less about what if, and more about – if not.
However we do know a couple of things today that we didn’t know just 5 years ago.
First is, we understand the markets are not what people think they are. Second, the Fed is not as omnipotent as most believe. Third, 70% to 80% of what the “mom and pop” 401K holders think are trades in the markets, is an illusion. Fourth: Everyone, including many of the very professionals that work and breathe Wall Street have learned absolutely nothing since the Lehman crisis.
And what’s maybe more important than all of those combined?
They believe the chances of it repeating are not only nil, they’re betting it wont. Besides they still believe: “The Fed’s got their back!”
Problem is – will the Fed be able to save its own rear end if it does happen? Let alone theirs.
We’ll know soon enough.

Monday, September 8, 2014

Interbank FX transfers MT4 accounts to FXCM

Dear valued client,

As you may already have heard, TradeStation has announced an agreement between its IBFX, Inc. and IBFX Australia Pty Ltd subsidiaries, and a subsidiary of FXCM Inc., in which all retail accounts in the “MetaTrader/MT4” division of both IBFX forex subsidiaries will be transferred to FXCM.

Having supported two forex business lines – MT4 and TradeStation – for some time, we have now decided to focus solely on our TradeStation Forex platform offering.

TradeStation’s success over the past 15 years is due in large part to the unique, differentiating features and functions offered by the TradeStation platform, and this move will enable us to focus our resources on continuing that success.

This change will not affect your TradeStation Forex account(s). Should you have any questions, please contact us.

Sincerely yours,

Gary Weiss,
President of IBFX, Inc.



Thursday, April 24, 2014

Chinese Currency Slumps To 19-Month Lows

The PBOC's willingness to a) enter the global currency war (beggar thy neighbor), and b) 'allow' the Yuan to weaken and thus crush carry traders and leveraged 'hedgers' is about to get serious. The total size of the carry trades and hedges is hard to estimate but Deutsche believes it is around $500bn and as Morgan Stanley notes the ongoing weakness means things can get ugly fast as USDCNY crosses the crucial 6.25 level where losses from hedge products begin to surge. This is a critical level as it pre-dates Fed QE3 and BoJ QQE levels and these are pure levered derivative MtM losses - not a "well they will just rotate to US equities" loss - which means major tightening on credit conditions...

CNY hits a critical level at 6.25...
This is a major problem because...
The seemingly incessant strengthening trend of the Chinese Yuan (much as with the seemingly inexorable rise of US equities or home prices) has encouraged huge amounts of structured products to be created over the past few years enabling traders to position for more of the same in increasingly levered ways. That was all going great until the last few weeks which has seen China enter the currency wars (as we explained here). The problem, among many facing China, is that these structured products will face major losses and as Morgan Stanley warns "real pain will come if CNY stays above these levels," leading to further capital withdrawal, illiquidity, and a potential vicious circle as it appears the PBOC is trying to break the virtuous carry trade that has fueled so much of its bubble economy.
As we noted previously... The total size of the carry trade is hard to estimate although even just looking at some of the onshore CNY positions accumulated, DB Asia FX strategist Perry Kojodjojo estimates that corporate USD/CNY short positions are around $500bn. The size of the carry trade and the fact that China saw significant capital outflows during the last period of substantial Renminbi depreciation in the summer of 2012 has led to concerns over what this might mean for both the Chinese economy and financial markets as well as broader global financial implications.
Morgan Stanley believes that one such carry-trade structured product that will be the "pressure point" for this - should the Yuan continue to depreciate - is the Target Redemption Forward (TRF)which has a payoff that looks as follows...
While this is just an example of a product payoff matrix to the holder, the broader point is that the USD/CNH market has a particular level (or range of potential levels) at which three factors can create non-linear price action. These are:

1. Losses on TRF products will (on average) crystallize if USD/CNH goes above a certain level. This has implications for holders of TRF products, who are mostly corporates;

2. The hedging needs of writers of TRF products (banks) mean that there is a point of maximum vega for banks in USD/CNH. Below this level banks need to sell USD/CNH vol; above this level banks need to buy USD/CNH vol;

3. The delta-hedging needs of banks are complex. As we approach the average strike (the 6.15 in the theoretical point of Exhibit 1), banks need to buy spot USD/CNH. Above this point but below the European Knock-in (EKI) (i.e., between 6.15 and 6.20 in Exhibit 1), banks need to sell spot. Then above the EKI, banks don’t need to do anything in spot.
From internal Morgan Stanley data, we estimate that the point of maximum vega is somewhere in the range of 6.15-6.20, and that the 6.15-6.20 in Exhibit 1 is reasonably indicative of the average strikes and EKIs in the market.

In other words, so long as the TRF products remain in place (i.e., are not closed out) and we remain below the maximum vega point (somewhere between 6.15 and 6.20), there is natural selling pressure by banks in USD/CNH vol. When we get above that level, there is natural vol buying pressure.

Of course, in the scenario that USD/CNH keeps trading higher and goes above the average EKI level, the removal of spot selling flow by banks and the need to buy vol means the topside move may accelerate.
Simply put, if the CNY keeps going (whether by PBOC hand or a break of the virtuous cycle above), then things get ugly fast...
How Much Is at Stake?
In their previous note, MS estimated that US$350 billion of TRF have been sold since the beginning of 2013. When we dig deeper, we think it is reasonable to assume that most of what was sold in 2013 has been knocked out (at the lower knock-outs), given the price action seen in 2013.
Given that, and given what business we’ve done in 2014 calendar year to date, we think a reasonable estimate is that US$150 billion of product remains.
Taking that as a base case, we can then estimate the size of potential losses to holders of these products if USD/CNH keeps trading higher.

In round numbers, we estimate that for every 0.1 move in USD/CNH above the average EKI (which we have assumed here is 6.20), corporates will lose US$200 million a month. The real pain comes if USD/CNH stays above this level, as these losses will accrue every month until the contract expires. Given contracts are 24 months in tenor, this implies around US$4.8 billion in total losses for every 0.1 above the average EKI.
Deutsche Bank concludes...
Looking forward it’s possible that the PBOC is not attempting to actively engineer a sustained depreciation of the Renminbi but rather is attempting to increase the level of two-way volatility in the market to discourage the carry trade and also excessive capital inflows. In terms of the broad risk going forward the sheer scale of the challenge the PBOC has set out to tackle likely means they will have to move with restraint. This is certainly a story to watch...
As Morgan Stanley warns however, this has much broader implications for China...
The potential for US$4.8 billion in losses for every 0.1 above the average EKI could have significant implications for corporate China in its own right, as could the need to post collateral on positions even if the EKI level is not breached.

However, the real concern for corporate China is linked to broader credit issues. On that, it’s worth reiterating that the corporate sector in China is the most leveraged in the world. Further loss due to structured products would add further stress to corporates and potentially some of those might get funding from the shadow banking sector. Investment loss would weaken their balance sheets further and increase repayment risk of their debt.

In this regard, it would potentially cause investors to become more concerned about trust products if any of these corporates get involved in borrowing through trust products. In this regard, this would raise concerns among investors, given that there is already significant risk of credit defaults to happen in 2014.
Remember, as we noted previously, these potential losses are pure levered derivative losses... not some "well we are losing so let's greatly rotate this bet to US equities" which means it has a real tightening impact on both collateral and liquidity around the world... yet again, as we noted previously, it appears the PBOC is trying to break the world's most profitable and easy carry trade - which has created a massive real estate bubble in their nation (and that will have consequences).
+++++++++++++
The bottom line is the question of whether the PBOC's engineering this CNY weakness is merely a strategy to increase volatility and thus deter carry-trade malevolence (in line with reform policies to tamp down bubbles) OR is it a more aggressive entry into the currency wars as China focuses on its trade (exports) and keeping the dream alive? (Or, one more thing, the former morphs into the latter as a vicious unwind ensues OR the market tests the PBOC's willingness to break their momentum spirit).
The escalation of the unwind in recent days suggests the vicious circle is beginning.
Finally, putting aside speculative trader P&L losses, many of which are said to be of Japanese origin and thus will hardly enjoy much or any PBOC sympathies, here is CLSA's Russel Napier on what the long-tern fate of the Renminbi will be:
“Mercantilist alchemy transmutes China’s external surpluses into foreign exchange reserves and renminbi. But with capital outflows from China at record highs, those surpluses are only maintained due to its citizens’ foreign-currency borrowing. Bank-reserve and M2 growth are already near historical lows and are driving tighter monetary policy. This will lead to severe credit-quality issues and force the authorities to accept a credit crunch or opt for a major devaluation of the renminbi. They will do the latter; and despite five years of QE, the world will get deflation anyway.”

Trade the recovery of the Yuan - Open a Forex account

Monday, January 13, 2014

Federal Reserve Said to Probe Banks Over Forex Fixing

The Federal Reserve is investigating whether traders at the world’s biggest banks rigged benchmark currency rates, raising the risk that firms will be penalized for lax controls as regulators look for wrongdoing.
The Fed, which supervises U.S. bank holding companies, is among authorities from London to Washington probing whether traders shared information that may have let them manipulate prices in the $5.3 trillion-a-day foreign-exchange market to maximize their profits, said a person with direct knowledge of the matter, asking not to be named because it’s confidential.
“The Fed has discretion whether to and how much to fine the banks if deficient controls or lack of supervision resulted in traders at these banks manipulating currency rates,” said Jacob S. Frenkel, a former federal prosecutor and now a lawyer at Shulman Rogers Gandal Pordy & Ecker PA in Potomac, Maryland.
The Fed punished firms for internal-control lapses last year as it worked with state and federal authorities on cases involving Iranian sanctions and botched derivatives bets. The foreign-exchange inquiry looks at benchmark WM/Reuters rates used by companies and investors around the world.
Those rates are determined by trades executed in a minute-long period called “the fix” at 4 p.m. in London each day. By concentrating orders in the moments before and during the 60-second window, traders can push the rate up or down, a process known in the industry as “banging the close.”

‘The Cartel’

Bloomberg News reported in June that traders at banks have been manipulating spot foreign-exchange rates for at least a decade, affecting the value of funds and derivatives. Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority, the Swiss Competition Commission and the U.S. Justice Department also are investigating.
At least a dozen banks have been contacted by authorities, and at least 12 currency traders have been suspended or put on leave. Companies including Lloyds Banking Group Plc and Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc have announced their own internal reviews of the matter.
Citigroup said last week it fired Rohan Ramchandani, who was head of European spot trading. Ramchandani was part of a message group other traders in the industry referred to as “The Cartel,” which is under investigation. He had been on leave from the New York-based firm for almost three months. Ramchandani didn’t respond to messages left on his mobile telephone, and his lawyer didn’t return a call to his office.

Potential Risks

Fed supervision focuses on potential risks to banks and assesses a firm’s ability to “identify, measure, monitor and control these risks,” according to the central bank’s website.
The regulator examines banks for weaknesses that could affect their safety and soundness or violate laws. If lapses are found, it can send a report to the company, issue an order, impose fines, remove officers or directors and bar them from the industry. Its oversight can include international operations of U.S. banks and the U.S. operations of foreign banks.
The Fed fined JPMorgan Chase & Co., the nation’s largest lender by assets, $200 million last year after a U.K. trader known as the London Whale for his outsized bets lost more than $6.2 billion on botched derivatives transactions. The regulator cited deficiencies in the New York-based company’s risk management and internal controls. JPMorgan paid more than $1 billion in fines tied to the trades, including settlements with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority.

Libor, ISDAfix

Other recent Fed enforcement actions include a $50 million penalty last month against RBS, which is based in Edinburgh. The Fed faulted the firm for inadequate risk management and legal-review policies that are needed to prevent transactions with countries subject to U.S. economic sanctions.
Authorities are looking for manipulation in a widening list of benchmark financial rates, including the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, and ISDAfix, used to determine the value of interest-rate derivatives.
“Because foreign-exchange regulation is largely nonexistent, the task falls to the Fed to use its regulatory powers to ensure that the banks address all controls associated with currency trading,” Frenkel said.

November Meeting

Foreign-exchange dealers from the world’s biggest banks told the Federal Reserve Bank of New York the global probe into manipulation of currency rates could prompt an overhaul of the way they handle customer orders, minutes from the Nov. 13 meeting released by the central bank show.
Currency chiefs from banks including JPMorgan, London-based Barclays and Citigroup met with six officials from the New York Fed at a meeting of the Foreign Exchange Committee -- an industry group sponsored by the New York Fed -- according to minutes released by the group.
“Private sector members suggested that any investigations and/or supervisory activity related to this subject could eventually result in recommended changes to best practice guidance,” according to the minutes from the meeting, which was hosted by JPMorgan.

Friday, December 13, 2013

Get better VPS for your Forex Trading

A VPS is a remote server "Virtual Private Server" that you connect to via software such as Windows Remote Desktop.  VPS offerings are fairly similar, but depending on where you live, your internet connection, and what broker you use, some VPS may be better for you.  So EES works with several VPS providers, as well as our own FX System Hosting.

Commercial Network Services (CNS), is an interesting provider, having several data centers, low latency to many FX brokers, and excellent customer service.  Checkout CNS latency chart here.

Here's a list of all the providers EES works with:

Option 1: FX System Hosting

Order VPS from FX System Hosting starting at $29.99 - The benefit of using FX System Hosting, you can order multiple products from one account, such as FX domain names, web hosting, and more.

Option 2: Commercial Network Services

Option 3: VPS Web Server

Option 4: Forex VPS

VPS Comparison: Why the options?

Each strategy is different, each broker is different, and they are always changing.  Some strategies may depend on latency and the number of hops, others may require a more robust trading machine.  By providing multiple options, EES FX gives traders the choice to use the VPS that suits their needs, and the ability to use multiple VPS at the same time.
Also, EES works with Introducing Brokers and other institutions to provide wholesale VPS solutions for their clients.  Also we have a data center in a secure location for backup and other redundancy.  Please contact us for these services.

Friday, November 15, 2013

The Forex Paradox - Is Forex a net loser?

The Forex market is the largest in the world and the least understood.  Since the late 90's, traders and asset managers have flocked to it as an alternative to trade, compared to other common markets (Stocks, Bonds, Futures).  
But due to the fact that the market is decentralized, and unregulated, it also attracted a large amount of fraud, on many levels.  First, there was outright theft by groups such as the one led by Trevor Cook ($190 Million Ponzi scheme).  Then there were sham brokers, in the most extreme case, like One World Forex, that simply didn't bother clearing client orders and used client funds to finance lavish lifestyles and a movie that was never released featuring Busta Rhymes.  Those in the new growing retail market on both sides of the dealing desk developed a special bond going through a unique experience that just wasn't possible in other markets.  
It was said that this was a retail problem, that serious institutional Forex was not aparty to such nonsense.  But now the world's largest investment banks are under investigation by the Department of Justice for Forex market rigging.  This includes names such as Goldman Sachs, Lloyds of London, JP Morgan Chase, Barclays, Citigroup, just to name a few (the full list of names has not been released).
It was always a question that Forex outsiders would ask, why the big banks didn't get into retail Forex trading.  Now we know that not only were some banks charging 7% (700 pip) spread on deliverable transactions, they were 'banging the close' and had basically a near complete control over the price.  So why would they take any risk?
But one of the most overlooked news stories is that of FX Concepts, known as the Rolls Royce of Forex funds, being the first in the business and eventually the largest FX hedge fund.
Less than a year before his currency-trading shop filed for
bankruptcy, FX Concepts founder John Taylor personally guaranteed a
chunk of the debt his firm owes to its largest creditor.
Asset Management Finance, a Credit Suisse unit that has invested
in a number of prominent hedge fund-management firms in the past decade,
provided $40 million of debt financing to FX Concepts via two
revenue-sharing agreements in 2006 and 2010. But in December 2012, as
opportunities in the currency market continued to fade and redemptions
mounted, Taylor was forced to renegotiate the financing package. The
Credit Suisse unit agreed to defer eight quarterly revenue-sharing
payments in exchange for Taylor’s personal guarantee for those
obligations. As of Oct. 17, when the firm filed for Chapter 11, FX
Concepts owed Asset Management Finance $34.4 million, with Taylor on the
hook for $5 million of the total. “AMF is going to clearly try to get money out of John,” a source said. “By any 
stretch of the imagination, it’s not there.”
The terms of the refinancing deal with Asset Management Finance,
spelled out in recent court documents, suggest FX Concepts was in even
worse shape than previously understood. The fact that Taylor had to
personally guarantee his firm’s obligations underscores a dramatic
decline for a business that for years was the world’s largest
currency-fund operator, with more than $12 billion of assets. As
recently as the first quarter, FX Concepts had $1 billion under
management. 
When traders would debate "is anyone making money in FX" - proponents of Forex investing and trading would point to FX Concepts as an example as a group that was continually successful.  For years they had multiple products that continued to acheive above average returns in the mysterious FX market.  Until now.  Not only is FX Concepts shutting down, creditors are going after the founder who pledged personal guarantees on capital when performance started struggling.
Certainly not every Forex trader or strategy loses, but with the losses incurred by FX Concepts, we should rethink our approach to trading Forex.
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-11-14/forex-paradox-forex-net-loser

Friday, November 1, 2013

Premium raw feed for non-us Forex traders

Global Intel Hub offers a raw feed with no markup, commission, or other hidden cost for Premium members.   The spreads are raw interbank spreads with no markup. 

See some sample spreads below:
GIH_PremiumFeed
Unfortunately, this offer is not available to US Citizens unless they qualify as a ECP.

Click here to register for a free demo account.

For more information, please Contact Structured Consulting.