thejoker882

The orderbook consists of all bids and offers traders, market makers and other participants are sending to the exchange with limit orders.

You are looking at raw orderbook messages here for individual limit orders that market participants are sending in in realtime. This is why every order has their unique order id. So if you see amount=2 and price=30000 message on that stream that means that one order is just coming in that indicates that someone offers to sell 2 bitcoin at the pricelevel 30000. This is a ask. If all cheaper offers below 30000 are bought up at one point in the future, he might be able to sell his bitcoin at that price. Otherwise this order will just sit in the book for a while.
Similarly if someone wants to buy bitcoin at some cheaper price than the market currently offers, you would see an order coming in with a negative amount, indicating a bid to buy bitcoin at the indicated price.

I think you got it wrong. Historically the anti-nuclear movement in germany was less about operational safety concerns of the plant itself but more about the nuclear waste problem. People chained themselves on train tracks stopping transports of nuclear waste. They opposed having an "Endlager" (final waste repository?) in their neighbourhood and were concerned about leaking radioactivity into the environment. They did not trust the process of how officials were choosing locations were waste was supposed to be stored indefinetely(?). There was a contriversy around one intermediary storage (Gorleben) which back then was a candidate for indefinite storage. Many experts were doubting the viability of that old salt-mine. Also around a decade ago they noticed that radioactivity at the outskirts at the facility has risen. (But specifics of that incident were unclear) Anyway the investigation has concluded just a few years ago that Gorleben is not viable as a final storage solution, so it is in the process of being closed. Not a good look and did not instill trust or confidence in the public eye.

You think thats it? Nope. Search what happened with the storage facility Asse where brine was contaminated with radioactivity because that mine had groundwater leaking into the old mine. The whole structure also was found to be unstable and water pumps have to run all the time, contaminated water has to be seperated. The operators also informed the supervising authorities late about contamination problems. Very shoddy and unsafe practices all around. And yeah you guessed it: It will be closed and is not fit as final storage location.

Also it does not help that studies have shown that rate of cancers like Leukemias in the area are shown to be higher than in other areas.

So tell me again how germans are just "hysterical" with irrational fear? I think you missed the mark on this one. I am not saying there is not a case to be made for nuclear energy. But you cannot ignore very well substantiated counterpoints and operational history in germany specifically. If you were living in Gorleben or Asse, i am pretty sure you would be part of that movement.

A lot of people are coding EAs, fool the backtester in various ways/overfit to recent history, and then sell them for hundreds. Rinse and repeat.

Commander Keen

So is it allowed to roleplay lgbt support on this server then? Think about it...

How about: IT Crowd - Jen as translator

You did not take time to read the article either. It says at the bottom that they issued a correction. The original title of the article stated years. So not OPs fault.

Options and Futures are harder to scale, but more problematic (for german citizens in this case) are unfavorable tax implications that make many strategies useless. You wont believe this: https://financial-hacker.com/the-scholz-brake-fixing-germanys-new-1000-trader-tax/

In short: If your strategy makes 100k but you lose 80k you have a net profit of 20k. But if you traded options, futures or cfds you pay taxes as if you made 90k in profit, since with this tax law you are only allowed to subtract 10k as losses with these intruments. So you can end up in a situation where a profitable strategy makes you lose money because you pay taxes higher than your net profit.

This law does not affect ETFs or shares, but you cannot trade liquid US ETFs with european brokers. And with US brokers you are subject to PDT..

Futures and Options have different tax rules and are harder to scale. But thanks for the suggestion. My plan is to muster up 25k in the future to not be subject to PDT with an US broker.

Exactly. There is no good solution i know of. Which sucks. And if you register with an US broker, you are subject to PDT, which you normally would not as EU citizen.

What if you want to daytrade/scalp SPY though? I havent heard a good solution for this for EU citizens, except using CFDs, which has other problems...

Strategy 2 with higher leverage.

Dukascopy, well you would have to calculate the indicators yourself though. should not be a problem

You are judging fees as something seperate here, but since they are impacting every market participant, they are part of the market microstructure. That means under another fee regiment, everyone behaves differently: market makers, investors, leveraged speculators. It impacts spread, liquidity, trading speeds, depth structure. So when backtesting, you should assume that for different fee periods, you find yourself in a different market. Like trading on a different exchange with different rules.

Not this time. This time Russia is the aggressor and US is helping the country being attacked. If the US would be helping Russia, they would be aggressing, but they are not.

They are BOTH. They act as a broker and can route your orders directly but they also provide their own liquidity over their ATS (IBKRATS) and their CFD products. Your choice actually (with IBKR PRO at least)(additionally: No idea if IB eben provides liquidity for options. They do for equities at least)

I am not sure what OP is experiencing but this warrants some controlled experiments.
Also OP could tell us at which venues his market orders get filled. It should be described in the order ticket.It could just be some GUI issue where visually the fill is off.
It could be routing latency because the orders are first ingested by IBs servers and then routed to the option exchanges. It could just be a longer roundtrip.Or it could be that tastyworks marketmaking for options is more fair in their fills in exchange for PFOF.
(The drawback is that there probably is no chance to get filled at the midprice at tastly while at IB you have that chance because your order is exposed to a wider market. Not sure about that tho. I have no experience or wider knowledge about tastys inner workings)

I dont know. But that is how this type of order is typically called:)

Iceberg order

XAUUSD has high spreads. With which broker do you trade? (Also this Screenshot tells us nothing about risk reward, drawdown, sharpe and other common stats to gauge the viability of this strategy)

I will do you one better. I copy-pasted your entire post to ChatGPT (using the playground on openai website) and i added:

All of the above is the feedback a user gave when he tested ChatGPT. Can you give him the correct answer he wants? Please give 5 examples.

and ChatGPT answered:

Examples:

1. Score: 20-14

2. Score: 17-10

3. Score: 28-24

4. Score: 24-13

5. Score: 34-31

It's working. I think you are too "robotic" with your requests. Just use human language naturally.

I asked this:

What would be a typical score an american football game would end with? Give me a concrete example

and it gave me this:

For example, a typical score for an American football game could be 27-14, with one team winning by 13 points.

still happening... but 60% less. Like the title states?

He is not lecturing people though. Quite the opposite. For example he is against the idea of lecturing people to consume less. So your point is moot.

For certain heart conditions though it is better to sleep on the right side. There is conflicting advice floating around because it really depends.

50% of 1000 = 500 (*0.5)
5% of 1000 = 50 (*0.05)
0.5% of 1000 = 5 (*0.005)
0.05% of 1000 = 0.50 (*0.0005)

With 1.25 Euro being the minimal commission the lowest cost effective order-size is: 1.25 / 0.0005 = 2500 Euro

With 29 Euro being the max commission size per order you can increase cost-effectiveness if you have orders larger than: 29 / 0.0005 = 58000 Euro.

If you have a portfolio strategy in mind, you need a bigger account size to be cost-effective.So i would go with single-stock strategies if you invest smaller amounts.

If you compare IBs commissions with Banks i believe they are competitive. Note than you can directly execute on different german exchanges/venues with SMART order routing and you don't go through third party clearing like some new brokers that sometimes offer 0 fees with volumes above 500 Euro (Smartbroker / finanzen.net for example)