Jump to content
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  

Cost of rollovers

Question

The last time I discussed rollovers with IG support, I was told that it was cheaper to do an auto rollover as the spread was halved instead of manually rolling over.  However, my current rollovers in the gold contract seem to have been made at the full spread.  Could you please advise why?

Also, how close to the futures expiry date is the next contract available to trade?

Thanks in  advance.

  • Thought provoking 1

Share this post


Link to post

2 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

To my horror, I have been told that this is no longer the case and the contract is rolled over at the current spread.  I have to then wonder what the advantage of automatic rollovers are; especially considering the fact you don't even get an email reminder when the rollovers are to take place and have no idea at what price.  Surely any sensible trader would take it upon him/herself to manage the rollover?

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Guest John
16 hours ago, psycho said:

To my horror, I have been told that this is no longer the case and the contract is rolled over at the current spread.  I have to then wonder what the advantage of automatic rollovers are; especially considering the fact you don't even get an email reminder when the rollovers are to take place and have no idea at what price.  Surely any sensible trader would take it upon him/herself to manage the rollover?

Although if you hold trades for a few weeks during a trend means needing to roll over though, on spot metals, commodities when its not possible to buy the underlying.   

I agree the roll over at full spread makes no sense, (you are paying for the borrowing), not to buy and sell every day. Seems like an extra way to slide in charges ........

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Topics
      12,742
    • Total Posts
      65,413
    • Total Members
      86,172
    Newest Member
    martyn88
    Joined 20/10/20 18:45
  • Posts

    • this probably should have been ignored, but IMHO it was a new low.  obviously jlz tried to help someone here, and referred to others to add emphasis to a point.  I'm writing this because I actually asked for support in my earlier response, and I'm very pleased I'm not the only one who reacted to this post thoughtfully, so I think it would be pretty weak if I didn't speak up here. That may make me look ridiculous, and like my tongue is now travelling through a bunch of cracks, but I don't give a **** (like I think you would not either).    I'm actually surprised that you @dmedin  left it to this statement - usually you're significantly more effective in warning people of the hazards we face as retail punters IMHO - I think you definitely had stronger moments. you know what I would find useful:  having a separate, focused thread for insults  - I'm sure by now the respective targets wouldn't mind (to not again say not give a ****), and other discussions could become - let's say "leaner". I genuinely think I got a lot of valuable insights from many of your posts here, and I highly appreciate the honest feedback, and I also believe you have good intentions. I don't know about any history between you, jlz, THT, and Caseynotes.  I further think you play an important role here in this forum and I look forward to more productive discussions with you. But the post quoted above was a new low.     
    • Wall Street holding up still 🤔  
    • I'd given up on Dax but here it comes!  
×
×