📊 Why Avoiding Choppy Markets Could Cost You Profits [Strategy Analysis]
Hi,
Lately, we've seen a surge in pause and disconnection requests, along with many traders asking whether it’s better to step aside and wait for a clearer opportunity.
The truth? Nobody can predict with certainty whether pausing will yield better results.
However, from a statistical standpoint, stopping trading just because the market is range-bound is usually a mistake.
Why? Because markets love to break out of narrow ranges, and Algocrat AI systems are designed to capitalize on these breakouts.
Narrow trading ranges are rare in crypto, and filtering them out often leads to missed profits.
Let’s take an example:
In August 2023, Bitcoin moved sideways for several weeks, similar to what’s happening now. Many traders might have thought it was wise to pause trading.
However, when the market finally broke out, over 60% of the profits were made in just two days as Bitcoin tanked. Had we paused, we would have missed out on these massive gains.
This isn’t an isolated case - it’s how markets typically work. Algocrat AI's systems already incorporate market-timing mechanisms, making manual interventions like pausing unnecessary and often counterproductive.
While it’s possible to filter out some losing trades by stopping during consolidations, systematically doing so leads to missing recoveries and the best trading days of the year, ultimately lowering long-term profitability.
We’ve tested countless timing strategies, and the best ones are already implemented. Every day, we explore new ways to refine our systems, and we’ve long since tested and discarded the idea of staying out during narrow ranges.
If it worked, we would have already adopted it. If it hasn’t been implemented, it’s because it doesn’t work. Simple as that.
Trading success isn’t about avoiding every short-term risk - it’s about consistently executing a proven strategy over time.
The market rewards discipline and data-driven decisions, not hesitation. If you stay in the game, you let the probabilities work in your favor.
By staying the course, you ensure that you’re positioned to capture the biggest opportunities when they arise.
Hope you find this valuable!
Best,
The Algocrat AI Team
Hi,
Lately, we've seen a surge in pause and disconnection requests, along with many traders asking whether it’s better to step aside and wait for a clearer opportunity.
The truth? Nobody can predict with certainty whether pausing will yield better results.
However, from a statistical standpoint, stopping trading just because the market is range-bound is usually a mistake.
Why? Because markets love to break out of narrow ranges, and Algocrat AI systems are designed to capitalize on these breakouts.
Narrow trading ranges are rare in crypto, and filtering them out often leads to missed profits.
Let’s take an example:
In August 2023, Bitcoin moved sideways for several weeks, similar to what’s happening now. Many traders might have thought it was wise to pause trading.
However, when the market finally broke out, over 60% of the profits were made in just two days as Bitcoin tanked. Had we paused, we would have missed out on these massive gains.
This isn’t an isolated case - it’s how markets typically work. Algocrat AI's systems already incorporate market-timing mechanisms, making manual interventions like pausing unnecessary and often counterproductive.
While it’s possible to filter out some losing trades by stopping during consolidations, systematically doing so leads to missing recoveries and the best trading days of the year, ultimately lowering long-term profitability.
We’ve tested countless timing strategies, and the best ones are already implemented. Every day, we explore new ways to refine our systems, and we’ve long since tested and discarded the idea of staying out during narrow ranges.
If it worked, we would have already adopted it. If it hasn’t been implemented, it’s because it doesn’t work. Simple as that.
Trading success isn’t about avoiding every short-term risk - it’s about consistently executing a proven strategy over time.
The market rewards discipline and data-driven decisions, not hesitation. If you stay in the game, you let the probabilities work in your favor.
By staying the course, you ensure that you’re positioned to capture the biggest opportunities when they arise.
Hope you find this valuable!
Best,
The Algocrat AI Team
🔒 "Are My ByBit Funds Safe?" [Market Analysis]
As you've probably heard, ByBit was hacked for approximately $1.4 billion worth of ETH yesterday.
This ranks among the largest hacks in history, crypto or otherwise.
Yet, despite the scale of the incident, ETH has barely reacted, and today we are seeing a strong reversal, recovering yesterday's losses.
Additionally, all available reports suggest that ByBit is successfully managing the situation.
As an indicator of confidence, the **Polymarket ByBit insolvency market** is currently trading at a 4% probability, continuously decreasing.
Is the market going to fall further?
Nobody can predict the future, but if this event were going to trigger a major sell-off, it likely would have already happened.
The day of the event presented a real risk, which is why Algocrat AI systems were shorting the market.
While they ultimately exited with a small loss, they were positioned to capitalize on a potential downturn.
However, no system wins every trade - nor should that be the goal. Risk management and strategic positioning remain the priority
How has it handled?
ByBit CEO Ben Zhou demonstrated a masterclass in transparency.
He stayed up all night, actively updating his X (formerly Twitter) account with details about the hack and even shared his fitness tracker stats from the day and night following the breach.
This is exactly how such situations should be handled - openly and responsibly.
What are we doing with our ByBit funds?
We haven't moved them. While there remains a small chance of ByBit insolvency, we consider it negligible.
For now, we remain confident in ByBit’s ability to manage the aftermath and continue operations smoothly.
Best,
The Algocrat AI Team
As you've probably heard, ByBit was hacked for approximately $1.4 billion worth of ETH yesterday.
This ranks among the largest hacks in history, crypto or otherwise.
Yet, despite the scale of the incident, ETH has barely reacted, and today we are seeing a strong reversal, recovering yesterday's losses.
Additionally, all available reports suggest that ByBit is successfully managing the situation.
As an indicator of confidence, the **Polymarket ByBit insolvency market** is currently trading at a 4% probability, continuously decreasing.
Is the market going to fall further?
Nobody can predict the future, but if this event were going to trigger a major sell-off, it likely would have already happened.
The day of the event presented a real risk, which is why Algocrat AI systems were shorting the market.
While they ultimately exited with a small loss, they were positioned to capitalize on a potential downturn.
However, no system wins every trade - nor should that be the goal. Risk management and strategic positioning remain the priority
How has it handled?
ByBit CEO Ben Zhou demonstrated a masterclass in transparency.
He stayed up all night, actively updating his X (formerly Twitter) account with details about the hack and even shared his fitness tracker stats from the day and night following the breach.
This is exactly how such situations should be handled - openly and responsibly.
What are we doing with our ByBit funds?
We haven't moved them. While there remains a small chance of ByBit insolvency, we consider it negligible.
For now, we remain confident in ByBit’s ability to manage the aftermath and continue operations smoothly.
Best,
The Algocrat AI Team
📉 Here's Why You Lose Money, Even with a Top-Performing System [Market Analysis]
Hey there,
Recently, we witnessed classic investor behavior with Algocrat AI: a drawdown led to a wave of disconnection requests and withdrawals.
Then, almost like clockwork, the best trading day of the year followed.
On Pepperstone, we recovered most of the drawdown.
On Binance, we hit an all-time high.
This isn’t a one-time fluke — it happens repeatedly.
Investors have an uncanny ability to exit at the worst possible moment.
We even backtested a strategy that increased risk when people withdrew funds and decreased risk when they topped up their accounts.
The result?
Performance improved.
Of course, we won’t use this, but it’s a clear sign: most investors act irrationally.
Why markets are ruthless psychological machines:
Financial markets are like vast, perfectly tuned casinos designed to exploit every quirk of human psychology.
The more investors manually interfere, the worse their results.
This isn’t just anecdotal — there’s extensive research on the subject, dating back to the famous 1981 study “Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to be Justified by Subsequent Changes in Dividends?”
Our own analysis confirms it: small market participants (retail investors) consistently lose money on average.
Why this happens?
Our brains were built for survival — not for trading.
This isn’t just a crypto phenomenon; it’s human nature.
Our instincts evolved for fighting predators and finding food, not managing risk in an algorithmic trading system.
When faced with a drawdown, our primal “fight or flight” response kicks in, leading to emotional, data-blind decisions.
Ironically, this is what makes trading profitable — for those who resist these impulses.
When you stay on the opposite side of trades made by panic-driven investors, aligning yourself with institutional players, you position yourself to win.
This is precisely how Algocrat AI systems work.
So, how do you beat the cycle of fear?
You can’t change your emotions, but you can change how you act upon them.
The best approach to algorithmic trading is simple:
1. Find a professional system with long-term proven profitability. (If you’re reading this, you’re already luckier than 99% of people)
2. Assess your risk, and either accept it or stay out.
3. Commit to the strategy.
Simple as that.
Second-guessing professional traders almost always results in missed profits or losses.
If the trader isn’t a professional, why would you trust them with your money in the first place?
Trading isn’t for everyone — and that’s okay
Algorithmic trading requires discipline.
If you can’t help but intervene at every hiccup, or if you panic at the first sign of trouble, trading might simply not be for you.
That’s not a failure — it’s a realization.
Many people aren’t suited for this, and that’s perfectly fine.
But if you can trust the process,
If you can stay the course,
The rewards will likely be there.
If that sounds exciting:
🔗 Apply Now and Secure Your Spot
Best regards,
The Algocrat AI Team
Hey there,
Recently, we witnessed classic investor behavior with Algocrat AI: a drawdown led to a wave of disconnection requests and withdrawals.
Then, almost like clockwork, the best trading day of the year followed.
On Pepperstone, we recovered most of the drawdown.
On Binance, we hit an all-time high.
This isn’t a one-time fluke — it happens repeatedly.
Investors have an uncanny ability to exit at the worst possible moment.
We even backtested a strategy that increased risk when people withdrew funds and decreased risk when they topped up their accounts.
The result?
Performance improved.
Of course, we won’t use this, but it’s a clear sign: most investors act irrationally.
Why markets are ruthless psychological machines:
Financial markets are like vast, perfectly tuned casinos designed to exploit every quirk of human psychology.
The more investors manually interfere, the worse their results.
This isn’t just anecdotal — there’s extensive research on the subject, dating back to the famous 1981 study “Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to be Justified by Subsequent Changes in Dividends?”
Our own analysis confirms it: small market participants (retail investors) consistently lose money on average.
Why this happens?
Our brains were built for survival — not for trading.
This isn’t just a crypto phenomenon; it’s human nature.
Our instincts evolved for fighting predators and finding food, not managing risk in an algorithmic trading system.
When faced with a drawdown, our primal “fight or flight” response kicks in, leading to emotional, data-blind decisions.
Ironically, this is what makes trading profitable — for those who resist these impulses.
When you stay on the opposite side of trades made by panic-driven investors, aligning yourself with institutional players, you position yourself to win.
This is precisely how Algocrat AI systems work.
So, how do you beat the cycle of fear?
You can’t change your emotions, but you can change how you act upon them.
The best approach to algorithmic trading is simple:
1. Find a professional system with long-term proven profitability. (If you’re reading this, you’re already luckier than 99% of people)
2. Assess your risk, and either accept it or stay out.
3. Commit to the strategy.
Simple as that.
Second-guessing professional traders almost always results in missed profits or losses.
If the trader isn’t a professional, why would you trust them with your money in the first place?
Trading isn’t for everyone — and that’s okay
Algorithmic trading requires discipline.
If you can’t help but intervene at every hiccup, or if you panic at the first sign of trouble, trading might simply not be for you.
That’s not a failure — it’s a realization.
Many people aren’t suited for this, and that’s perfectly fine.
But if you can trust the process,
If you can stay the course,
The rewards will likely be there.
If that sounds exciting:
🔗 Apply Now and Secure Your Spot
Best regards,
The Algocrat AI Team
📊 +0.31% / February 2025 [Monthly Performance]
Hi,
February was a challenging month, but Algocrat AI once again proved the power of sticking to a well-defined strategy.
This month, we saw:
📈 Account Growth: +0.31%
📉 Maximum Drawdown: 27.48%
While the drawdown was significant, our systems stayed true to their strategy and fully recovered, reinforcing the importance of long-term discipline in trading.
This serves as an important reminder: high rewards come with high risks.
Even as a top-performing system, Algocrat AI will go through phases of significant drawdowns—just as it has in the past and as it will again in the future.
These periods are part of the process, and history has shown that staying the course is the key to long-term success.
As always, for a detailed breakdown of our performance, you can check our verified MyFxBook track record:
🔗 Click Here To Access Our MyFxBook Track Record
Best regards,
The Algocrat AI Team
Hi,
February was a challenging month, but Algocrat AI once again proved the power of sticking to a well-defined strategy.
This month, we saw:
📈 Account Growth: +0.31%
📉 Maximum Drawdown: 27.48%
While the drawdown was significant, our systems stayed true to their strategy and fully recovered, reinforcing the importance of long-term discipline in trading.
This serves as an important reminder: high rewards come with high risks.
Even as a top-performing system, Algocrat AI will go through phases of significant drawdowns—just as it has in the past and as it will again in the future.
These periods are part of the process, and history has shown that staying the course is the key to long-term success.
As always, for a detailed breakdown of our performance, you can check our verified MyFxBook track record:
🔗 Click Here To Access Our MyFxBook Track Record
Best regards,
The Algocrat AI Team
🤫 Why Hedge Funds Love When You Trade Manually [Market Theory]
Recently, Bitcoin was stuck in a narrow range.
Then, out of nowhere, one of the biggest crypto hacks in history occurred — ByBit was breached, losing over $1.4 billion in ETH.
This was the largest hack ever recorded. Yet, even Ethereum barely reacted, reversing strongly the next day.
This should have been an obvious signal: the market was refusing to drop despite catastrophic news.
Any rational observer would assume that shorting crypto was the wrong move.
Yet, just two days later, both BTC and ETH tumbled significantly — for no apparent reason.
Why?
Because market moves are driven by liquidity, not news.
A quantitative explanation can be found in market microstructure theory, as discussed in The Market Microstructure Theory by Maureen O’Hara.
Prices don’t simply react to news — they shift based on how liquidity providers and large traders adjust their positions in response to order flows, not facts.
Why BTC and ETH didn’t react heavily to the ByBit hack?
No major liquidity providers or leveraged traders were forced to unwind their positions.
But two days later, a seemingly random price drop may have been caused by a cascading deleveraging event, where a large player was forced to exit for completely unrelated reasons.
The market isn’t rational—it’s an ecosystem of traders, funds, and algorithms reacting to liquidity imbalances.
Here's why price moves often have hidden causes:
If we analyze on-chain data and order book imbalances, we would find that the major moves correlate with liquidation levels, not fundamental catalysts.
Historically, large crypto moves have far stronger ties to forced liquidations and hidden leverage than to traditional economic events.
Another explanation comes from market efficiency theory, as outlined in A Random Walk Down Wall Street by Burton Malkiel.
Markets absorb information almost instantly, meaning that any predictable response to news is immediately arbitraged away by high-frequency trading algorithms.
How retail traders are outmatched by algorithms:
Market-making firms and hedge funds deploy machine learning models trained on vast historical datasets.
These models don’t trade based on whether news is “good” or “bad”— they trade on statistical inefficiencies, liquidity flows, and execution strategies.
A retail trader trying to “front-run” the ByBit hack was competing against HFT algorithms pricing in this news in milliseconds.
Some Algocrat AI clients attempted to outthink the market by manually buying BTC at what seemed like a perfect moment — only to see the price collapse days later.
Why manual trading Is a losing game:
Humans are simply too slow.
By the time an event seems to warrant a rational response, market makers, hedge funds, and algorithms have already acted.
The price drop two days after the hack could have been caused by internal portfolio rebalancing by a major institution or a coordinated move by market makers — factors entirely invisible to the retail trader.
The market isn’t irrational — it follows a logic inaccessible to traders who rely on human intuition instead of quantitative models.
What seems like “irrational” price action is actually rooted in complex factors like liquidity flows, hidden leverage, and instant arbitrage opportunities.
In such an environment, relying on human intuition or news-based trades is a high-risk gamble.
That’s why Algocrat AI doesn’t chase narratives:
Instead, it harnesses a momentum-based approach to trading crypto pairs, focusing on quantifiable inefficiencies where real edge lies.
By relying on data-driven signals rather than headlines, it seeks to navigate the market’s hidden logic,
And capitalize on opportunities beyond the grasp of manual strategies,
Delivering "too good to be true" results, for 6 years in a row.
Best regards,
The Algocrat AI Team
PS - What are you waiting to capitalize on such opportunities yourself? Click here to apply now
Recently, Bitcoin was stuck in a narrow range.
Then, out of nowhere, one of the biggest crypto hacks in history occurred — ByBit was breached, losing over $1.4 billion in ETH.
This was the largest hack ever recorded. Yet, even Ethereum barely reacted, reversing strongly the next day.
This should have been an obvious signal: the market was refusing to drop despite catastrophic news.
Any rational observer would assume that shorting crypto was the wrong move.
Yet, just two days later, both BTC and ETH tumbled significantly — for no apparent reason.
Why?
Because market moves are driven by liquidity, not news.
A quantitative explanation can be found in market microstructure theory, as discussed in The Market Microstructure Theory by Maureen O’Hara.
Prices don’t simply react to news — they shift based on how liquidity providers and large traders adjust their positions in response to order flows, not facts.
Why BTC and ETH didn’t react heavily to the ByBit hack?
No major liquidity providers or leveraged traders were forced to unwind their positions.
But two days later, a seemingly random price drop may have been caused by a cascading deleveraging event, where a large player was forced to exit for completely unrelated reasons.
The market isn’t rational—it’s an ecosystem of traders, funds, and algorithms reacting to liquidity imbalances.
Here's why price moves often have hidden causes:
If we analyze on-chain data and order book imbalances, we would find that the major moves correlate with liquidation levels, not fundamental catalysts.
Historically, large crypto moves have far stronger ties to forced liquidations and hidden leverage than to traditional economic events.
Another explanation comes from market efficiency theory, as outlined in A Random Walk Down Wall Street by Burton Malkiel.
Markets absorb information almost instantly, meaning that any predictable response to news is immediately arbitraged away by high-frequency trading algorithms.
How retail traders are outmatched by algorithms:
Market-making firms and hedge funds deploy machine learning models trained on vast historical datasets.
These models don’t trade based on whether news is “good” or “bad”— they trade on statistical inefficiencies, liquidity flows, and execution strategies.
A retail trader trying to “front-run” the ByBit hack was competing against HFT algorithms pricing in this news in milliseconds.
Some Algocrat AI clients attempted to outthink the market by manually buying BTC at what seemed like a perfect moment — only to see the price collapse days later.
Why manual trading Is a losing game:
Humans are simply too slow.
By the time an event seems to warrant a rational response, market makers, hedge funds, and algorithms have already acted.
The price drop two days after the hack could have been caused by internal portfolio rebalancing by a major institution or a coordinated move by market makers — factors entirely invisible to the retail trader.
The market isn’t irrational — it follows a logic inaccessible to traders who rely on human intuition instead of quantitative models.
What seems like “irrational” price action is actually rooted in complex factors like liquidity flows, hidden leverage, and instant arbitrage opportunities.
In such an environment, relying on human intuition or news-based trades is a high-risk gamble.
That’s why Algocrat AI doesn’t chase narratives:
Instead, it harnesses a momentum-based approach to trading crypto pairs, focusing on quantifiable inefficiencies where real edge lies.
By relying on data-driven signals rather than headlines, it seeks to navigate the market’s hidden logic,
And capitalize on opportunities beyond the grasp of manual strategies,
Delivering "too good to be true" results, for 6 years in a row.
Best regards,
The Algocrat AI Team
PS - What are you waiting to capitalize on such opportunities yourself? Click here to apply now
🔬 Here's A Detailed Comparison of Results Across Different Brokers [Strategy Analysis]
One of the most frequently discussed topics in the Algocrat AI community is why trading results vary across different brokers.
While we are working on a scalable copytrading solution to ensure identical trades for all users (for better and for worse), we decided to conduct a long-term comparison, analyzing several different brokers head-to-head with the public Pepperstone account.
But before diving into the results, let’s cover some fundamentals,
Why do results differ across brokers?
There are two main reasons why trading outcomes vary between brokers:
1. Execution and Expenses – The better a broker's execution and the lower its expenses, the better the results
2. Quote Differences – Since Algocrat AI's trading algorithms operate on individual accounts, variations in quotes between brokers influence trade execution. These differences are random and, unlike execution discrepancies, cannot be predicted in advance. However, over longer periods, these random variations tend to cancel out, making results more comparable.
Pepperstone: A benchmark for comparison
Among the brokers we work with, Pepperstone stands out for its excellent execution and competitive expenses.
While all brokers undergo a rigorous selection process before we integrate them, not all are created equal. Pepperstone ranks among the best, making it a logical benchmark for our comparison.
IC Markets: slightly better
As shown in the screenshots, IC Markets' performance has been slightly better than Pepperstone's from mid-April 2024 to March 2025. Long-term results are practically the same, with occasional slight variations due to differences in quotes and execution.
Fusion Markets: a close contender
Fusion is one of the most popular brokers among Algocrat AI users and frequently discussed in relation to result differences. We examined accounts that have been trading with Fusion since April 2024 and compared their performance to Pepperstone.
• Fusion slightly outperformed Pepperstone, delivering a 10.17% return compared to 10.00% on Pepperstone – a 1.7% difference in Fusion’s favor.
• If we shift the comparison start date to mid-May 2024, Fusion’s advantage increases to approximately 5%.
• However, for certain periods, Pepperstone performs better. The key takeaway? Over long periods, results between the two brokers are nearly identical.
Why does Fusion's performance spark debate?
If Fusion outperforms Pepperstone for the last 10.5 months, why is it a source of frustration for some traders? Short-term performance swings.
• Imagine joining in January 2024, only to see a -6% loss on Fusion while Pepperstone gained +6%. That’s frustrating.
• Yet, in February 2024, Fusion rebounded with a +6-7% profit, while Pepperstone hovered around 0%.
• This is how trading works: the longer the timeframe, the less significant quotes-based differences become.
Vantage: a shorter trading history, a similar story
Our trading history with Vantage began in September 2024, making long-term comparisons more challenging. However:
• So far, Vantage has slightly underperformed Pepperstone. Yet, Vantage’s highest equity peak exceeded Pepperstone’s. If we had compared results up to early February, the conclusion would have flipped, favoring Vantage instead
• Again, long-term results remain close, with short-term differences based on specific start dates
What about OX Securities?
Unlike Fusion or Vantage, OX Securities stands out for having noticeably weaker execution than most brokers.
However, this doesn’t mean results are drastically worse. OX Securities lags behind Pepperstone by approximately 2.89% (9.99/9.71-1), making results almost equal.
• Over seven months, the difference remains relatively small, proving once again that execution plays a role but does not make or break long-term profitability.
• Right now, OX Securities sits at an all-time high with 8% made in February, while Pepperstone is in a drawdown with close to zero result in February.
One of the most frequently discussed topics in the Algocrat AI community is why trading results vary across different brokers.
While we are working on a scalable copytrading solution to ensure identical trades for all users (for better and for worse), we decided to conduct a long-term comparison, analyzing several different brokers head-to-head with the public Pepperstone account.
But before diving into the results, let’s cover some fundamentals,
Why do results differ across brokers?
There are two main reasons why trading outcomes vary between brokers:
1. Execution and Expenses – The better a broker's execution and the lower its expenses, the better the results
2. Quote Differences – Since Algocrat AI's trading algorithms operate on individual accounts, variations in quotes between brokers influence trade execution. These differences are random and, unlike execution discrepancies, cannot be predicted in advance. However, over longer periods, these random variations tend to cancel out, making results more comparable.
Pepperstone: A benchmark for comparison
Among the brokers we work with, Pepperstone stands out for its excellent execution and competitive expenses.
While all brokers undergo a rigorous selection process before we integrate them, not all are created equal. Pepperstone ranks among the best, making it a logical benchmark for our comparison.
IC Markets: slightly better
As shown in the screenshots, IC Markets' performance has been slightly better than Pepperstone's from mid-April 2024 to March 2025. Long-term results are practically the same, with occasional slight variations due to differences in quotes and execution.
Fusion Markets: a close contender
Fusion is one of the most popular brokers among Algocrat AI users and frequently discussed in relation to result differences. We examined accounts that have been trading with Fusion since April 2024 and compared their performance to Pepperstone.
• Fusion slightly outperformed Pepperstone, delivering a 10.17% return compared to 10.00% on Pepperstone – a 1.7% difference in Fusion’s favor.
• If we shift the comparison start date to mid-May 2024, Fusion’s advantage increases to approximately 5%.
• However, for certain periods, Pepperstone performs better. The key takeaway? Over long periods, results between the two brokers are nearly identical.
Why does Fusion's performance spark debate?
If Fusion outperforms Pepperstone for the last 10.5 months, why is it a source of frustration for some traders? Short-term performance swings.
• Imagine joining in January 2024, only to see a -6% loss on Fusion while Pepperstone gained +6%. That’s frustrating.
• Yet, in February 2024, Fusion rebounded with a +6-7% profit, while Pepperstone hovered around 0%.
• This is how trading works: the longer the timeframe, the less significant quotes-based differences become.
Vantage: a shorter trading history, a similar story
Our trading history with Vantage began in September 2024, making long-term comparisons more challenging. However:
• So far, Vantage has slightly underperformed Pepperstone. Yet, Vantage’s highest equity peak exceeded Pepperstone’s. If we had compared results up to early February, the conclusion would have flipped, favoring Vantage instead
• Again, long-term results remain close, with short-term differences based on specific start dates
What about OX Securities?
Unlike Fusion or Vantage, OX Securities stands out for having noticeably weaker execution than most brokers.
However, this doesn’t mean results are drastically worse. OX Securities lags behind Pepperstone by approximately 2.89% (9.99/9.71-1), making results almost equal.
• Over seven months, the difference remains relatively small, proving once again that execution plays a role but does not make or break long-term profitability.
• Right now, OX Securities sits at an all-time high with 8% made in February, while Pepperstone is in a drawdown with close to zero result in February.
Since long-term results across brokers remain close while short-term fluctuations can be significant, the best approach is to diversify funds across multiple brokers with similar trading conditions. This strategy provides additional diversification and minimizes the impact of temporary performance differences.
How can you get the best possible results?
We also see that, over the long run, Binance has slightly better results than most other brokers, including Pepperstone. If you have access to Binance, it offers some of the best trading conditions overall
What does this tell us?
• Execution and expenses matter, but long-term results between good brokers tend to converge.
• Short-term differences are inevitable and can lead to frustration, but zooming out reveals the bigger picture.
• Random quote variations exist and affect short-term results but balance out over time.
• Diversifying across multiple brokers can help mitigate short-term fluctuations.
The takeaway is clear:
Focusing on long-term strategy rather than short-term fluctuations is the key to success. No broker will always be the best, but choosing one with strong execution and reasonable expenses ensures consistency over time.
Best,
The Algocrat AI Team
How can you get the best possible results?
We also see that, over the long run, Binance has slightly better results than most other brokers, including Pepperstone. If you have access to Binance, it offers some of the best trading conditions overall
What does this tell us?
• Execution and expenses matter, but long-term results between good brokers tend to converge.
• Short-term differences are inevitable and can lead to frustration, but zooming out reveals the bigger picture.
• Random quote variations exist and affect short-term results but balance out over time.
• Diversifying across multiple brokers can help mitigate short-term fluctuations.
The takeaway is clear:
Focusing on long-term strategy rather than short-term fluctuations is the key to success. No broker will always be the best, but choosing one with strong execution and reasonable expenses ensures consistency over time.
Best,
The Algocrat AI Team