Criminally misleading

[dylan1234]

This is the 3rd time I've posted on this issue and none of the previous posts has made it to the IG Forum, so I'm having another go. Clearly IG don't want this point made.I have traded currencies on a live account with Oanda for a decade so I know the ropes. I recently opened a demo account with IG in order to test the site and with a view to depositing over £10K to trade US stocks. The trading strategy worked well, very well, so I deposited a few thousand to get me going. I used the same strategy in exactly the same way, but got very different results on the live platform. I soon realized that although IG, despite what it says about the almost identical similarity between it's demo and live platforms, hides some key differences. When placing Stop orders in demo trades fill at, or very close to, the order instruction. However in live they filled at levels. I understand gapping and spreads, but the difference between the fills in demo and live is astonishing. I placed the same 2 separate trades on today simultaneously, same levels, one in live and one in demo. In demo one sell trade filled at 4325, in live it filled at 3815. That's a difference of 510, a mind-boggling 12%. Same with the other trade. How can anyone reasonably expect to make a profit if IG's algorithms fleece traders with disgraceful fills and IG mislead traders with contrasting information? This shouldn't be the case as the demo platform should reflect exactly the live platform for the sake of accuracy and integrity so traders in demo get a clear understanding of what works before they deposit real money. Anything different is misleading, a con and criminal. I've attached screenshots of live and demo showing the differences. Let's see if this gets posted, but I'm going to make a complaint regardless, and withdraw every penny.

[Caseynotes]

11 minutes ago, dylan1234 said:

This is the 3rd time I've posted on this issue and none of the previous posts has made it to the IG Forum, so I'm having another go. Clearly IG don't want this point made.I have traded currencies on a live account with Oanda for a decade so I know the ropes. I recently opened a demo account with IG in order to test the site and with a view to depositing over £10K to trade US stocks. The trading strategy worked well, very well, so I deposited a few thousand to get me going. I used the same strategy in exactly the same way, but got very different results on the live platform. I soon realized that although IG, despite what it says about the almost identical similarity between it's demo and live platforms, hides some key differences. When placing Stop orders in demo trades fill at, or very close to, the order instruction. However in live they filled at levels. I understand gapping and spreads, but the difference between the fills in demo and live is astonishing. I placed the same 2 separate trades on today simultaneously, same levels, one in live and one in demo. In demo one sell trade filled at 4325, in live it filled at 3815. That's a difference of 510, a mind-boggling 12%. Same with the other trade. How can anyone reasonably expect to make a profit if IG's algorithms fleece traders with disgraceful fills and IG mislead traders with contrasting information? This shouldn't be the case as the demo platform should reflect exactly the live platform for the sake of accuracy and integrity so traders in demo get a clear understanding of what works before they deposit real money. Anything different is misleading, a con and criminal. I've attached screenshots of live and demo showing the differences. Let's see if this gets posted, but I'm going to make a complaint regardless, and withdraw every penny.

I'm pretty sure IG specifically states that the demo platform does not show slippage at all, it can't as it's not hooked up to the live feed (nor can be), and neither has any other broker's demo platform I've used.

[dylan1234]

You're pretty sure? Really, where, show me then. If it is it is buried away in some small level of legal print. It is not made clear and transparent at the outset. Big, important legal messaging like the standard disclaimer stating  '76% of traders lose money' appears on the homepage and clearly thereafter. Nowhere does it say 'a demo account for fun which differs hugely from the live account you might open'. Being successful in demo encourages customers to think they will be successful live, and that is the ultimate driver for customers, being successful and earning real money. 

[Fletch]

https://www.ig.com/uk/help-and-support/accounts-and-statements/my-accounts/how-does-a-demo-account-differ-from-a-live-account#:~:text=Trades made through the demo,grounds of size or price

'Trades made through the demo account will not be subject to slippage, interest and dividend adjustments, or out-of-hours price movements'

 

[dylan1234]

Thanks. But the point stands. It is fundamentally wrong and dishonest. What is the point of a demo account if not to mimic exactly what happens with a live account at the real market? The entire concept of demo is to ease customs in and upgrade then to a live account and deposit their money, Romney which will disappear quickly based on the non-transparency of IG. It gives customers a false, inaccurate and misleading view of the platform, the market, their skill and of the broker. Nothing will change, but it stinks to high heaven....

[Caseynotes]

2 minutes ago, dylan1234 said:

Thanks. But the point stands. It is fundamentally wrong and dishonest. What is the point of a demo account if not to mimic exactly what happens with a live account at the real market? The entire concept of demo is to ease customs in and upgrade then to a live account and deposit their money, Romney which will disappear quickly based on the non-transparency of IG. It gives customers a false, inaccurate and misleading view of the platform, the market, their skill and of the broker. Nothing will change, but it stinks to high heaven....

No broker has their demo plugged into a live market so demo can never respond as if it was.

The main reason for the demo version is for the platform developers to use it as a test bed for new updates before releasing them onto the live platform.

It 's a secondary consideration to allow clients to use it to get to know the platform and trial strategies to gauge if they might work live.

 

[dylan1234]

Are you for real? If that were the case and it was for internal purposes then customers wouldn't get access to it, that's a naive or misleading statement. The purpose of a demo account is to draw customers in, a marketing tool, to let them try without and skin in the game. IG are a multi-million pound, commercial organisation, customers are their lifeblood, their revenue stream, they need new customers every day to survive. The vast majority of customers join via a demo account before upgrading to a live account, that is reality and fact. But when they upgrade to a live platform, and then the goalposts have shifted beyond all reason.

[Caseynotes]

15 minutes ago, dylan1234 said:

Are you for real? If that were the case and it was for internal purposes then customers wouldn't get access to it, that's a naive or misleading statement. The purpose of a demo account is to draw customers in, a marketing tool, to let them try without and skin in the game. IG are a multi-million pound, commercial organisation, customers are their lifeblood, their revenue stream, they need new customers every day to survive. The vast majority of customers join via a demo account before upgrading to a live account, that is reality and fact. But when they upgrade to a live platform, and then the goalposts have shifted beyond all reason.

Yes I'm for real and unlike youself actually do know what I'm talking about, of course the developers made the demo as a test platform. Oh, and we can also let clients use it as well - great.

Clients use the demo to get to know it's basic functions then rapidly move on to the live platform. Clients join to trade not play on a games machine, I wonder why you do?

Edited March 17, 2021 by Caseynotes

[dylan1234]

No surprise again. Aren't you supposed to be a helpful and professional resource to assist customer? Wouldn't that be a refreshing idea? No sign of 'let's see where the issue is, what have you been doing, let's help you better understand'. Just the usual unhelpful, aggressive, defensive, bullying, insulting, condescending, unprofessional responses as I've seen from you across many threads.

[Caseynotes]

5 minutes ago, dylan1234 said:

No surprise again. Aren't you supposed to be a helpful and professional resource to assist customer? Wouldn't that be a refreshing idea? No sign of 'let's see where the issue is, what have you been doing, let's help you better understand'. Just the usual unhelpful, aggressive, defensive, bullying, insulting, condescending, unprofessional responses as I've seen from you across many threads.

Oh, as opposed to the tone of your OP from the get-go you mean? ...

''Criminally misleading', fleece traders, mislead traders, misleading, a con and criminal''

I was just enlightening you as to the facts and reasonably politely as well considering you where obviously just pulling this stuff out of your backside having jumped on the forum for a whinge meltdown on the mistaken presumption you already knew everything.

 

 

[dylan1234]

Thanks for proving my last point so well.......

[Caseynotes]

17 hours ago, Caseynotes said:

I'm pretty sure IG specifically states that the demo platform does not show slippage at all

when I said '' I'm pretty sure IG specifically ... '' what I actually meant was that I was absolutely certain and knew exactly where to find it but I was rather hoping you might have had the nouse to do a little research work for yourself.

Fat chance when a continous ranting whinge is so much easier.

[dylan1234]

...and again...

[THT]

Best way to learn is by real life trading - I've never used a demo account ever - it doesn't represent the real world

You're right to be sceptical as this game is full of sharks all taking a slice

It is frustrating when bad price data skews spreads, slippage etc - but they are factors in the game of trading that we have to accept and build into our trading plans, routines/methods etc

I'm 100% with you though - the demo's should be an exact replica of the real-life accounts, as it is a bit naughty - its a bit like training a runner to run 800 metres and then when race day comes tell them "oh by the way, people will be throwing things at you around the track, we might put a few obstacles in your path too - but try to get the same time or better that you've got in this training bubble"!

 

[Caseynotes]

7 minutes ago, THT said:

Best way to learn is by real life trading - I've never used a demo account ever - it doesn't represent the real world

You're right to be sceptical as this game is full of sharks all taking a slice

It is frustrating when bad price data skews spreads, slippage etc - but they are factors in the game of trading that we have to accept and build into our trading plans, routines/methods etc

I'm 100% with you though - the demo's should be an exact replica of the real-life accounts, as it is a bit naughty - its a bit like training a runner to run 800 metres and then when race day comes tell them "oh by the way, people will be throwing things at you around the track, we might put a few obstacles in your path too - but try to get the same time or better that you've got in this training bubble"!

 

The demo and the live have 2 different feeds and can never be identical, never have been on any platform that I'm aware of.

Doesn't really matter though as that's not the reason many systems work on demo but not on live, the difference is how the person plays their system. No one ever learnt how to be a trader on demo, can't because there is never any real risk on demo and learning about and understanding risk is the essence of trading.

 

[THT]

1 minute ago, Caseynotes said:

The demo and the live have 2 different feeds and can never be identical, never have been on any platform that I'm aware of.

Doesn't really matter though as that's not the reason many systems work on demo but not on live, the difference is how the person plays their system. No one ever learnt how to be a trader on demo, can't because there is never any real risk on demo and learning about and understanding risk is the essence of trading.

 

I think that's the point, they shouldn't have differing feeds - it's most likely [any warning/info etc] a tiny foot note on the demo, when it should be plastered clear as day to warn would be newbies 

I'd be furious if it happened to me - I approached learning from an angle of complete miss-trust of everything I read, looked at or was told until I'd researched and tested things for myself and it served me well, which most people won't enter the trading game from

People need to know the games against you from the off rather than being left to work it out for themselves - platforms offering free this and free that have a responsibility to show and highlight all the risks involved, rather than take peoples money and let them figure it out along the way

The FCA's forced betting sites to provide educational content to help people win and ease the pain of people losing their accounts / savings etc - either people aren't applying the tuition properly or the tuition pages don't actually work as the failure rate is 76%, but box ticked

There are of course some people in life that just cannot be helped and are on self-destruct mode from the off, but not the masses

I've been in this game for years and everything is against the newbie - false claims, poor explanation of how spreads, slippage etc works against you, synthetic markets etc etc

As long as the FCA sits back and lets it happen nothing will happen and then if the industry was regulated then that would bring in a whole host of issues too

 

[Caseynotes]

7 minutes ago, THT said:

I think that's the point, they shouldn't have differing feeds - it's most likely [any warning/info etc] a tiny foot note on the demo, when it should be plastered clear as day to warn would be newbies 

I'd be furious if it happened to me - I approached learning from an angle of complete miss-trust of everything I read, looked at or was told until I'd researched and tested things for myself and it served me well, which most people won't enter the trading game from

People need to know the games against you from the off rather than being left to work it out for themselves - platforms offering free this and free that have a responsibility to show and highlight all the risks involved, rather than take peoples money and let them figure it out along the way

The FCA's forced betting sites to provide educational content to help people win and ease the pain of people losing their accounts / savings etc - either people aren't applying the tuition properly or the tuition pages don't actually work as the failure rate is 76%, but box ticked

There are of course some people in life that just cannot be helped and are on self-destruct mode from the off, but not the masses

I've been in this game for years and everything is against the newbie - false claims, poor explanation of how spreads, slippage etc works against you, synthetic markets etc etc

As long as the FCA sits back and lets it happen nothing will happen and then if the industry was regulated then that would bring in a whole host of issues too

 

The price feeds are 2 way, if you hook up the demo to the live feed then the demo becomes live so that's not going to happen.

There is plenty of education but most newbies want to just 'have a go' the first time round and end up getting scorched, tough.

After that if they want to contiue they buckle down and do some learning, fine. 

There are enough regulations already in place and IG does stick to them so there is little point in someone who hasn't done any homework calling criminal practice every time they trip themself up, as was shown above a 1 minute search was all that was needed to learn the difference between demo and live, there must be some responsibility on the participant.

 

[THT]

5 minutes ago, Caseynotes said:

The price feeds are 2 way, if you hook up the demo to the live feed then the demo becomes live so that's not going to happen.

There is plenty of education but most newbies want to just 'have a go' the first time round and end up getting scorched, tough.

After that if they want to contiue they buckle down and do some learning, fine. 

There are enough regulations already in place and IG does stick to them so there is little point in someone who hasn't done any homework calling criminal practice every time they trip themself up, as was shown above a 1 minute search was all that was needed to learn the difference between demo and live, there must be some responsibility on the participant.

 

Oh I agree with all that - not everyone is that way inclined though and as it's super easy to shove some funds into a trading account and just go, then the providers have to do more in my opinion, rather than collecting a newbies funds as they end up going bust

I just think the providers can and should do much much more - I know they won't, but I can fully understand peoples frustrations - I went through the same over 10 years ago 

[Caseynotes]

1 minute ago, THT said:

Oh I agree with all that - not everyone is that way inclined though and as it's super easy to shove some funds into a trading account and just go, then the providers have to do more in my opinion, rather than collecting a newbies funds as they end up going bust

I just think the providers can and should do much much more - I know they won't, but I can fully understand peoples frustrations - I went through the same over 10 years ago 

yes, though with every new regulation introduced on the good brokers the hundreds of offshore unregulated brokers see a big increase in new clients. The enrty bar just keeps getting raised and forces people out into the wilderness where they are far more likely to run into trouble..

It's at the stage now where people are complaining on here that IG won't take them on even with A$20K backing.

We've all had to go through the learing curve, it's very hard and takes a lot of time, don't see that increased regulation can shorten that or replace doing the homework.

IG's company statements show they make their money off the bigger traders not new clients who probably cost more than they are worth and it's not in IG's interest that they fail but the reality is that nearly everyone fails the first time they try something new.

[Stonk]

I just wanted to chip in my expoerience as a new user.

I spent a few weeks playing with the Demo account before going live.  I would say:

(a) I tried hard to think of the Demo money as real, with mostly success.  I was very careful with it, and got really upset about losing Demo money.  The annoyances subsided gradually, but only because I was exercising my risk muscle and getting used to the idea that you can't win 'em all.  That said, ultimately I always knew it was not real cash, and that must have affected my actions to some extent no matter how much I tried to suppress it.

(b) I was completely aware from material I had real on IG's site that Demo would be unlike Live in several ways.  Of course, if you don't want to spend time reading what they provide, then you won't see this information.  I deemed that the most important difference affecting me would be slippage (I'm not big enough to move the market with my trades), and indeed it has been.  On Demo, as far as I could tell, the prices were exactly like Live, but the big difference is that you always trade at exactly the price you ask for.  On Live, it's completely normal to experience a bit of slippage, especially on stops hit rapidly.

(c) In my opinion, the introductory offer of reduced minimums is absolutely the best way to learn -- way better than the Demo account.  It's real money that hurts to lose, but hopefully not too seriously, and you get hit full on by everything that's against you.  The only catch is it only lasts a month, and I cannot get good enough in that time.

[Caseynotes]

7 minutes ago, Stonk said:

I just wanted to chip in my expoerience as a new user.

I spent a few weeks playing with the Demo account before going live.  I would say:

(a) I tried hard to think of the Demo money as real, with mostly success.  I was very careful with it, and got really upset about losing Demo money.  The annoyances subsided gradually, but only because I was exercising my risk muscle and getting used to the idea that you can't win 'em all.  That said, ultimately I always knew it was not real cash, and that must have affected my actions to some extent no matter how much I tried to suppress it.

(b) I was completely aware from material I had real on IG's site that Demo would be unlike Live in several ways.  Of course, if you don't want to spend time reading what they provide, then you won't see this information.  I deemed that the most important difference affecting me would be slippage (I'm not big enough to move the market with my trades), and indeed it has been.  On Demo, as far as I could tell, the prices were exactly like Live, but the big difference is that you always trade at exactly the price you ask for.  On Live, it's completely normal to experience a bit of slippage, especially on stops hit rapidly.

(c) In my opinion, the introductory offer of reduced minimums is absolutely the best way to learn -- way better than the Demo account.  It's real money that hurts to lose, but hopefully not too seriously, and you get hit full on by everything that's against you.  The only catch is it only lasts a month, and I cannot get good enough in that time.

yes that all sounds about right and real. Very important point is starting off live with the absolute minimum position size the broker will allow and building up as you and your system prove yourself. If it's not working out then not too much harm done and can start over with account still mostly intact.

 

[THT]

55 minutes ago, Caseynotes said:

yes, though with every new regulation introduced on the good brokers the hundreds of offshore unregulated brokers see a big increase in new clients. The enrty bar just keeps getting raised and forces people out into the wilderness where they are far more likely to run into trouble..

It's at the stage now where people are complaining on here that IG won't take them on even with A$20K backing.

We've all had to go through the learing curve, it's very hard and takes a lot of time, don't see that increased regulation can shorten that or replace doing the homework.

IG's company statements show they make their money off the bigger traders not new clients who probably cost more than they are worth and it's not in IG's interest that they fail but the reality is that nearly everyone fails the first time they try something new.

The regulation will force the providers to do things in the best interests of their customers - I worked for 2 decades in an enforced regulatory environment as a financial adviser - the regulation forces everything to be above board, warnings highlighted multiple times and everything for the benefit of the customer - of which the bigger more trustworthy firms will excel within

[Caseynotes]

11 minutes ago, THT said:

The regulation will force the providers to do things in the best interests of their customers - I worked for 2 decades in an enforced regulatory environment as a financial adviser - the regulation forces everything to be above board, warnings highlighted multiple times and everything for the benefit of the customer - of which the bigger more trustworthy firms will excel within

Some regulations of course protect clients but a good broker also wants to protect clients as well and regulators regularly over reach.

When the EU regulator ESMA forced brokers to lower leverage from 200:1 to 20:1 in early 2018 there was over 14,000 letters of protest written by retail clients which were of course ignored. Then there was a mad dash for IG clients to open accounts with the Australian branch but many others just left for other brokers overseas.

Researchers latter reported that after a year their was no real benefit to retail clients at all from the new regulations.

We are now seeing the FCA banning leveraged crypto all together, clients wanting to trade will just go elsewhere.

The SEC banning CFDs just lead to increased options trading in the US instead.

 

[THT]

Oh you can guarantee that once the FCA get involved it changes for the worst - what I'm meaning is have some form of regulation for the providers as it would force them to publish and highlight all the risks much more clearly to punters

I remember having a dinner with the head of the FCA and the shadow chancellor back in 2008 ish - problem they have is the decision makers aren't from or on the coal face so they end up making stupid decisions for everyone - don't think that went down too well with them at the time

[Mcg]

22 hours ago, dylan1234 said:

Are you for real? If that were the case and it was for internal purposes then customers wouldn't get access to it, that's a naive or misleading statement. The purpose of a demo account is to draw customers in, a marketing tool, to let them try without and skin in the game. IG are a multi-million pound, commercial organisation, customers are their lifeblood, their revenue stream, they need new customers every day to survive. The vast majority of customers join via a demo account before upgrading to a live account, that is reality and fact. But when they upgrade to a live platform, and then the goalposts have shifted beyond all reason.

The live account is never going to be the same as the demo, that much is obvious. A better way is to try out the live account with minimal leverage.

In terms of slippage, I've never had much of a problem. I only trade indices though.. a couple of times there have been significant gaps over my stops during periods of volatility and I probably lost 3-4 times what I should have, but that’s just one of the risks involved with the game. And I’m talking only a few times across probably thousands of trades over a decade, if anything the execution is pretty good. More recently the platform has gone down for a few hours which is a bigger and more stressful problem. 

If you’re doing individual stocks then gap risk is much higher.. not much you can do about it when they’re more prone to those sorts of moves. 

[Stonk]

On 17/03/2021 at 14:14, dylan1234 said:

This is the 3rd time I've posted on this issue and none of the previous posts has made it to the IG Forum, so I'm having another go. Clearly IG don't want this point made.I have traded currencies on a live account with Oanda for a decade so I know the ropes. I recently opened a demo account with IG in order to test the site and with a view to depositing over £10K to trade US stocks. The trading strategy worked well, very well, so I deposited a few thousand to get me going. I used the same strategy in exactly the same way, but got very different results on the live platform. I soon realized that although IG, despite what it says about the almost identical similarity between it's demo and live platforms, hides some key differences. When placing Stop orders in demo trades fill at, or very close to, the order instruction. However in live they filled at levels. I understand gapping and spreads, but the difference between the fills in demo and live is astonishing. I placed the same 2 separate trades on today simultaneously, same levels, one in live and one in demo. In demo one sell trade filled at 4325, in live it filled at 3815. That's a difference of 510, a mind-boggling 12%. Same with the other trade. How can anyone reasonably expect to make a profit if IG's algorithms fleece traders with disgraceful fills and IG mislead traders with contrasting information? This shouldn't be the case as the demo platform should reflect exactly the live platform for the sake of accuracy and integrity so traders in demo get a clear understanding of what works before they deposit real money. Anything different is misleading, a con and criminal. I've attached screenshots of live and demo showing the differences. Let's see if this gets posted, but I'm going to make a complaint regardless, and withdraw every penny.

 

 

When were these positions opened?  The times shown are when they closed.  The prices in the upper screenshot (from Demo) were simply not available at 13:30-13:31 on the 17th.

Immatics was around 1170 at close on the 16th and gapped up to open around 1550 on the 17th.

NRG Energy was around 4350 at close on the 16th and gapped down to open around 3800 on the 17th.

As such, it would appear that Live gave you correct prices and there's nothing much to complain about.

Either the Demo trades were opened the day before, or somehow Demo filled you just after opening on the 17th with an incorrect price taken from the closing moments of the 16th.

 

Edited March 18, 2021 by Stonk

[jlz]

Hi Dylan1234, can we see that complaint that you are going to file? 

A demo account is never going to be the same as the live account. Many people have complained about it, always as a rant more than an actual action, but I've never seen an actual formal complaint that would challenge the behaviour of a demo account. 

It would be interesting to see where that complaint is ending at, how it is filed, its format and who is addressed to.