Tag Archives: Foreign Exchange

I believe it was New Jersey governor Chris Christy I saw saying to his constituents before Hurricane Sandy hit something to the effect of damage was going to happen despite their best efforts because they couldn’t prevent the storm barreling through.  This is a lesson for investors.

Markets do not always do what we want them to do. That’s a fact of life as an investor or trader. We can do all kinds of great analysis, pick just the right market or security or investment vehicle but still get hit by something unexpected or unavoidable. The investors who survive these sorts of events, and even thrive coming out of them, are the ones who are prepared, while those thinking only of how much they stand to make in the markets are the ones swept away.

It all comes down to risk management. And it has become clear in recent years that the old methods of diversification through spreading money around low-correlated markets are no longer sufficient. Markets which are largely uncorrelated during good times have a tendency to becoming strongly correlated during troubled times – exactly what the old diversification systems relied on them not doing. As I shared with my Twitter and Facebook followers, even just looking at stocks we have seen big swings in the correlation of individual securities with the overall market (which interestingly has gotten low recently). This requires a different type of thinking.

And even if we get the diversification side of things right, that doesn’t completely mitigate our big picture risk. There is always something that can come along and put our hard-earned money at risk. That is where worst case scenario type analysis has to take place. This is where many in the financial sector fell flat, leading to the financial crisis. They felt comfortable with the risk of their portfolios as indicated by the Value-at-Risk (VAR) models they were using, forgetting to account for what could happen beyond the 95% confidence level – events virtually inevitable in the long run. It’s the remaining 5% they should have been worried about, as it’s in that area where they lost their business and very nearly locked up the whole financial system.

The same goes for an individual. Identify the worst and prepare of it. The tools Currensee has put in place in the Trade Leaders program definitely help do just that. You won’t be able to avoid taking some losses along the way, but if you prepare properly you can avoid seeing your financial well-being get swept out to sea.

Modern Portfolio Theory remains a major part of many investment portfolio allocation processes. Basically, the idea of MPT is that one can combine a collection of securities into a portfolio which offers comparable return prospects with reduced risk. This is done by mixing together stocks and other assets which are not well correlated, or perhaps are negatively correlated.

Sounds good, right?

The problem is, as has been discussed, that individual stocks have become extremely highly correlated to the market in recent years. This, by definition, means they have become increasingly correlated to each other as well, reducing the opportunity for diversification in portfolios using the old methods.

Another issue with MPT-based portfolio development is the fact that correlations change over time and in different time frames. The chart below from Oanda shows a recent set of correlations between EUR/USD and other currency pairs (as well as gold and silver).

Notice in the AUD/USD column how the correlations to EUR/USD are strongly positive (darkest red) in the hour, day, and week time frames, but then are uncorrelated in the longer time frames, and even negatively correlated at 3 months. In the case of USD/JPY we can see the correlations are very time frame depended, running the full spectrum over the time frames. Even with silver and gold (XAG/USD and XAU/USD) the correlations aren’t consistently strongly positive.

All this correlation variation creates considerable challenges to standard asset allocation and portfolio development methods and approaches. Imagine creating a portfolio of stocks that have been properly minimally correlated only to have them all become highly correlated? It would totally change the portfolio’s risk dynamics, and likely at the worst possible time.

This is where the importance of considering diversification not just in terms of markets and securities, but also in terms of trading/investing approach becomes clear. This is the approach of fund-of-fund investors. They seek out uncorrelated money managers, exactly the same sort of thing you can do by taking part in the Trade Leaders program.

One of the subject that’s come up in market discussion of late is the low level of the VIX, the so-called “fear index”. It has reached its lowest levels since back in the early days of the Financial Crisis in 2007. The chart below shows how the VIX has moved up and down since 1992.

The question which comes to my mind is whether we’re seeing a pattern similar to the one following the 1998-2003 period of elevated VIX value where the index retraces back to a lower level for a while as it did in the middle 1990s. The action in the markets in the early 2000s and the likes of Enron knocked a lot of individual investors out of stocks, just as recent developments have done. That makes a case for a similar kind of shift in volatility.

Just for the sake of comparison, I think it’s worth looking at volatility in other ways as well to see how things are playing out. The chart below shows the S&P 500 over the same time frame as the VIX chart. The two subplots show the relative width of the monthly Bollinger Bands (BWI) and a normalized 14-month reading of Average True Range (N-ATR). These give us a reading on how much movement there is in monthly closing prices and how wide the monthly ranges are respectively.

It is interesting to note that the Bollingers are back to being nearly as narrow as they were in the middle 2000s after working back from getting very wide back in 2009. As with the VIX, there is still some room to work lower to match prior lows, but we’re back into roughly the same range.

The N-ADR reading is a different story, though. In this case we’re nowhere near back to the lows of the middle 2000s and middle 1990s. In fact, N-ADR has been rising the last year! This tells us that while price changes from month to month may be getting smaller, the inter-month volatility remains elevated. Could this be a tip-off?

As a technical analyst I have a major concern with the way the S&P 500 made a lower low on the monthly chart back in 2009. That’s a big negative. Add to that the fact that momentum in the rally since then has backed off, as indicated by the lessening beats of prior highs for recent new highs, and you get reason for concern. If the market cannot overcome the 2007 highs on this rally, we could be in for quite a bit of a tumble. And when stocks tumble, volatility tends to rise quite dramatically. Generally speaking, before the top is put in the N-ATR reading is already on the rise. We’re seeing that now, so it’s definitely worth keeping that in mind, though given that we’re looking at monthly charts here, it may be a while yet before any sort of roll-over takes place.

Have you been paying attention to the changing markets?

Once upon a time all the talk was about how stocks and the dollar traded in opposing directions. The chart below with weekly bars shows how that was definitely the case until the latter part of 2011 (S&P 500 left scale, blue plot; USD Index right scale, black plot). Since then, though, with the exception of a few months earlier this year, the two markets have been trending higher roughly in tandem.

That’s a bit of an illusion, though.

You see, the USD Index is very heavily weighted toward the euro. That means it trades very close to how EUR/USD trades. As a result, it doesn’t always provide a comprehensive view the way we’d normally expect from an index.

Here’s something a bit more representative. It’s the same weekly chart, but swaps out the USD Index and replaces it with AUD/USD. Here you can see a VERY close correlation between the two markets.

So why the difference?

Well, AUD/USD is a good proxy for the so-called commodity currencies. Other commodity-oriented pairs are NZD/USD, USD/CAD, and many of the emerging market pairs like USD/MXN and USD/BRL. These are economically sensitive currencies, so they have a strong link to the stock market. Thus the strong correlation.

The euro, on the other hand, has all sorts of stuff going on which influences its exchange rate. It’s not just a function of economic growth but also of monetary policy and general confidence. The same can be said about both the yen and the pound. Further, since the Swiss National Bank effectively has the franc pegged to the euro (it’s really a floor on EUR/CHF, but is acting like a peg), the CHF is basically trading the same as the EUR.

What this all means is that we can no longer just look at “the dollar” and its relationship to stocks, commodities, and interest rates. We have to account for the variance in the performance of different currencies depending on the influencing factors if our analysis can have any validity. We may get back to the point where EUR/USD and the S&P 500 close correlate as they have done in the past, but for now we need to focus on the likes of AUD/USD and USD/CAD in our inter-market analysis of stocks, commodities, and the greenback.

Stock prices have been held back for at least the last two years, as the continued turbulence in the euro-zone – alongside the stop/go nature of America’s recovery from the ‘Great Recession’ – has weighed heavily on investor sentiment.

The bulls argue that the incessant focus on the well-known macroeconomic travails in both Europe and the US has seen investors ignore the stellar improvement in the corporate sector’s fundamentals since the profits cycle reached its nadir more than three years ago; the positive spin contends that the virtual sideways movement in the major stock market averages since the spring of 2010 has pushed equity valuations to the most attractive levels in more than a generation.  Is the optimism justified?

It is beyond dispute that the corporate sector’s recovery from the ‘Great Recession’ has been nothing short of impressive.  After-tax corporate profits, as reported by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, dropped by more than a third between the autumn of 2006 and the winter of 2008 – the steepest decline since quarterly data was first collected in 1947, and almost double the average of the previous ten contractions.

Record earnings seemed a long way off as stock prices plummeted towards their crisis lows during the spring of 2009, but somewhat surprisingly to say the least, corporate profits recovered their pre-recession peak by the end of the very same year.  The robust uptrend was sustained in subsequent quarters, and return on net worth reached the highest level since the late-1990s in recent times, while the corporate sector captured a record share of GDP.

The bulls’ frustration with the stock market’s refusal to move higher seems justified in light of the headline numbers concerning trends in corporate profitability.  However, a more probing analysis demonstrates that there are valid reasons behind investors’ unwillingness to attach a higher multiple to current earnings.

S&P earnings data reveals that cost-containment and the accompanying margin improvement accounts for almost three-quarters of the cumulative increase in per-share profits over the last three years, with top-line growth accounting for the remainder.  The relatively minor contribution from revenue gains has seen per-share sales fail to exceed their pre-recession peak.

By way of comparison, profit gains during the previous earnings expansion that extended from the end of 2001 to the summer of 2007, were shared relatively evenly between margin improvement and revenue growth.  Further, the quarterly year-on-year growth in sales-per-share averaged almost four per cent back then, as against just two per cent today.

It is important to appreciate that the magnitude of the economic downturn that accompanied the global financial crisis saw the corporate sector trim their cost structures to the bone.  Troubling, the subsequent lukewarm recovery has seen little let-up in this regard, and though this may well have pushed both corporate profits and cash flow generation to all-time highs, but the reluctance to reinvest the gains in either human capital or productive assets has created a negative feedback loop that threatens not only to hold economic growth below trend, but also to lower the economy’s potential future growth rate.

It is fair to say that the ‘Great Recession’ sparked serious erosion in labour’s bargaining power that is likely to persist for the indefinite future.  The unemployment rate surged to a peak of ten per cent in the autumn of 2009, as the corporate sector responded forcefully to reverse the sharp drop in profitability.  However, the high rate of joblessness combined with unsustainable household debt levels to virtually assure nothing more than a modest rebound in final demand, which in turn, has led to a relatively jobless recovery.

Subdued job growth has seen the unemployment rate persist above eight per cent for more than forty months, and the downward pressure on real wages has seen the labour share of GDP drop to the lowest levels on record.  The stagnation in household incomes means that final demand is sure to remain lacklustre, which in turn, means the unemployment rate will remain elevated.  All told, high rates of long-term unemployment and the resulting erosion of human capital could well result in a loss of productivity and lower potential future growth.

The economic downturn had a pronounced negative effect not only on the labour market, but also on net new investment in the productive capital stock.  Business investment dropped by than a fifth through the downturn, and though corporate cash flows have surged to the highest level on record, capital expenditures remain below their pre-recession peak, and have not recovered to their long-term average relative to GDP.

The current high return on corporate assets alongside historically low interest rates has not proved sufficient to generate a robust investment cycle, as high levels of macroeconomic uncertainty have kept most companies on the sidelines.  In a nutshell, the relatively low investment rate could well lead to a decline in labour productivity with a corresponding fall in the economy’s sustainable growth rate.

The upturn in corporate profitability in recent years is undoubtedly impressive, but persistently high unemployment alongside a relatively low investment rate means that the economy’s sustainable long-term growth rate is in jeopardy.  Investors are right to attach a low multiple to current earnings.

 

www.charliefell.com

Be sure to read the full risk disclosure before trading Forex. Please note that Forex trading involves significant risk of loss. It is not suitable for all investors and you should make sure you understand the risks involved before trading. Performance, strategies and charts shown are not necessarily predictive of any particular result. And, as always, past performance is no indication of future results. Investor returns may vary from Trade Leader returns based on slippage, fees, broker spreads, volatility or other market conditions.

The forex market continues to make some folks nervous. While there are certainly reasons to be cautious when playing exchange rates, a considerable amount of the nervousness of the average person on the street comes from misinformation. Most notably, they all too often think of the forex market as being highly volatile. I addressed this issue before in Looking at Volatility Across Markets, but I think it’s worth revisiting.

I’ve collected 5 years of weekly values for a number of markets to look at just how volatile they are. Let me first look at the US Dollar Index. Between July 2007 and July 2012 the average weekly range for the USD Index was just 2%. I derived that by taking the distance between each week’s high and low and dividing it by the midpoint for that week [( High – Low)/( (High+Low)/2) ]. At the same time, the standard deviation of weekly closing prices (which gives us an idea of how choppy the market is) was only 4.9% (relative to the average close for the study period).

As you will see, that’s not a lot of volatility.

Let’s start by comparing the USD Index values to those from the major US stock indices.

DJIA: 4.0% average weekly range, 15.0% standard deviation
S&P 500: 4.4% average weekly range, 16.0% standard deviation
NASDAQ 100: 4.7% average weekly range, 20.2% standard deviation
Russell 2000: 5.6% average weekly range, 17.3% standard deviation

As you can see, the major stock indices show considerably more volatility than does the USD Index.

How about individual stocks?

JPM: 9.4% average weekly range, 15.0% standard deviation
IBM: 4.8% average weekly range, 24.6% standard deviation
GE: 7.4% average weekly range, 39.9% standard deviation
XOM: 5.1% average weekly range, 12.0% standard deviation
KO: 4.0% average weekly range, 15.3% standard deviation
AAPL: 7.2% average weekly range, 53.5% standard deviation
KO: 6.2% average weekly range, 18.0% standard deviation

No real surprise to see that individual stocks are pretty volatile by comparison.

Looking at commodities:

CRB Index: 3.9% average weekly range, 18.2% standard deviation
Gold: 4.6% average weekly range, 28.1% standard deviation
Crude Oil: 8.4% average weekly range, 24.2% standard deviation

Here again we see markets with a great deal more volatility than the USD Index. The one place where there is something of a contest is the bond market. The long-date Treasury note/bond ETF is TLT. Looking at its weekly figures I come up with a 3.2% average range and 10.6% standard deviation. That’s considerably less volatility than the other markets and securities shown above, but still not at low as what we have seen the last five years in the USD Index. We would likely have to move down to short-term Treasury securities (like 2yr Notes and T-Bills) to find lower values.

The point of all this is that anyone avoiding the currency market because of the perception that it’s super volatile is operating on a false belief. The figures just don’t back that up.

 

The prospect of having an investment industry genius strategically (and often aggressively) managing your asset allocations in an attempt to kill risk and crank out returns can be alluring. Add to that the current upsets throughout the global economy, and despite their stigmatic volatility, hedge funds are looking pretty tempting.

Unfortunately for many retail investors, the restrictions that determine who can access a hedge fund don't leave much in terms of acceptance. In order to invest in these managed funds, one must either be an accredited investor with $1 million plus in liquid assets and a $200,000+/year paycheck, or a qualified purchaser, who owns at least $5 million in investments already. This clearly narrows the investor diversity scope down a bit.

But, the shell of the hedge fund industry looks like it’s finally starting to crack. Recent findings of financial research firm Cerfulli Associates published in an InvestmentNews article last week demonstrated that money managers expect their allocations into alternative investments to increase by at least 50% over the next three years. Investors and financial advisors also have a growing desire to increase alternative investments to negate market downturns and create a divergence from the stock and bond market.

But what does this have to do with making the elusive world of hedge funds more mainstream? It seems the ripples caused by an overall increase in demand for alternative investments have reached the mutual fund industry in the form of something known as ‘alternative mutual funds’.

Funds of this sort fall into alternative sectors such as long-short equity (one of the more popular), currencies, precious metals, and commodities. Taking it to the next level, alternative mutual funds twisted and evolved a bit further into something very similar, known as hedge-like mutual funds (the two names are often even interchanged.) These funds have the potential to hedge risk and generate stronger returns using some of the same strategies and tools that hedge fund managers use.

The most attractive characteristic of investing in a hedge-like mutual fund is that now, average-income investors can access the advantages of hedge fund investing previously available only to those qualified to invest in a hedge fund. Because the SEC regulates them, hedge-like mutual funds preserve some amount of the conservatism and transparency that is demonstrated within traditional mutual funds. Unfortunately, this can also impact these funds negatively in that it restricts their flexibility and requires a greater level of liquidity.

Though these crossbreed mutual funds aren’t anything new and earth shattering, Cerulli predicts that within the next five years, their presence will increase to the point of comprising 10 percent of mutual fund assets - a 245+ percent surge. The fueling of their growth really comes down to one thing: education. Money managers who strive to educate financial advisers on their investment products are the ones seeing positive results. This is due simply to the fact that many advisers are not yet familiar with all of their options in alternatives available to them. And we all know how easy it is to fear the unknown.

The theme of taking an investment that was once unavailable to traditional investors and making it available to them is common across the alternative investing landscape. Hedge-like mutual funds have successfully done what Currensee is striving to accomplish by carrying out this theme. Just the way hedge fund management, tools, and strategies were only available to high net-worth investors at one time, not long ago the world currency market experienced the same inaccessibility. However, with the emergence of various types of trade replication software and autotrading, even those with no prior knowledge of currency trading can allocate a portion of their investments to this type of alternative.

-------

Be sure to read the full risk disclosure before trading Forex. Please note that Forex trading involves significant risk of loss. It is not suitable for all investors and you should make sure you understand the risks involved before trading. Performance, strategies and charts shown are not necessarily predictive of any particular result. And, as always, past performance is no indication of future results. Investor returns may vary from Trade Leader returns based on slippage, fees, broker spreads, volatility or other market conditions.

Yesterday, Currensee officially announced Jonathan Jesse as Vice President of Engineering. With over 15 years of software development, engineering, and technology experience, Jesse will undoubtedly be an integral asset to Currensee’s team of technologists.

With a rapidly growing financial technology company, comes the inherent need to build a strong group of seasoned software engineers to support that growth. This is something that Currensee has been successful at from the beginning, which is demonstrated in the emphasis put on the size and talent of the current engineering force.

Few Currensee employees know the back-end of the company as well as Director of Software Development, Emanuel Kdziela. Having been with Currensee from its start, Emanuel knows the Forex collaboration platform inside and out. It’s always interesting to learn why people love to do the jobs they’re doing, and with Emanuel’s near four-year tenure with Currensee, something must be keeping him coming back each day.

“It's a company with a lot of promise, clearly on its way to success and presents interesting challenges,” says Emanuel. “I also like the people I work with and enjoy our culture.”

Culture is definitely what sets Currensee apart from the Boston financial crowed, and likely what has kept us progressing throughout the years. The Currensee “Pips”, our 30+ person team, are truly the ones who make being here everyday an absolute pleasure. This group of innovative and hard working professionals comprised of engineers, sales people, product developers, marketers, and many more, have all contributed to building Currensee into what it is today.

Recently, we have been quite fortunate in our ability to further expand upon our team of technologists as a means of improving our product and continuing to foster its growth and development. As an already engineer-heavy company, more brains can only add to the innovation, right?

“The tech team here at Currensee is great because it is made up of top notch, smart, hard working engineers,” says Emanuel.

As demand for portfolio diversification with alternative investments increases, the Forex industry has seen an overall surge in investor interest. As a pioneer on the front of bringing both retail and institutional investors professional Forex money managers through advanced autotrading software, Currensee has been undergoing a bit of a growth spurt itself.

But, as with all great things, there’s still a splash of reality to be mindful of. Working at a company that’s redefining an industry while carving out a new technology and investing concept isn’t always all glamour.

“It definitely has its challenges and difficulties, but that just makes success that much more meaningful and rewarding,” says Emanuel.

That’s the beauty of Currensee, though. If you want to be challenged in your career and grow as a professional, working at a young - but not too young - FinTech firm is where you need to be.

-------

Be sure to read the full risk disclosure before trading Forex. Please note that Forex trading involves significant risk of loss. It is not suitable for all investors and you should make sure you understand the risks involved before trading. Performance, strategies and charts shown are not necessarily predictive of any particular result. And, as always, past performance is no indication of future results. Investor returns may vary from Trade Leader returns based on slippage, fees, broker spreads, volatility or other market conditions.

1 Comment

High frequency trading (HFT) has gotten a lot of press over the last several years. The so-called “Flash Crash” of May 2010 highlighted the impact HFT can have on the markets, though the focus has mainly been on the stock market. No real surprise there. The average person on the street still thinks of stocks first when the subject of trading comes up. That’s not the only place HFT’s influence is being seen, though, as a recent newswire piece indicates.

Here’s the first part of the Dow Jones story (which can be read on the Wall Street Journal site here):

Electronic inter-dealer currencies-trading platform EBS plans to scrap the fifth decimal place on its currency quotes and introduce so-called half-pip pricing ahead of major changes to the system, people familiar with the matter told Dow Jones Newswires Tuesday.

EBS, owned by ICAP PLC (IAP.LN), has been considering a range of options that will change the way investors are allowed to trade on the system in a bid to repair relations with its core banking customer base. EBS shares a dominant position in currency markets with Thomson Reuters (TRI), but it has come under fire from its core bank clients for allowing trading behavior that seemingly favors so-called high-frequency traders in recent years. Now it is seeking to redress that balance.

This article caught my attention because I recently reviewed a book titled Broken Markets on the subject of market structural changes and how HFTs have been able to exploit them. One of those changes is the move to decimalization made by the stock exchanges in the US in 2000. That helped narrow bid/ask spreads, which lowered trading costs. According to the book’s authors, though, it also created a lot more price points for trades to take place, leading to thinner liquidity at any given point, which is something noted in the Dow Jones story from the forex perspective. It also created greater opportunity for HFTs to come in and do their thing (some of which is highly predatory). The introduction of pipettes (fractions of pips) in forex has served the same purpose.

The move by EBS, as motivated by their customers (mainly the major banks – see The Dominant Players in Forex), is to pull that back a bit. The banks are feeling the pressure in their dealing margins, which have already been squeezed considerably. Back when I started in this business the bid/ask spread on USD/JPY was consistently 10 pips and up. It’s more like 2-3 pips these days most of the time, which means the banks who are acting as market makers are making much less profit per trade.  This spread compression, combined with rapid technological development, has been a big factor in the shrinking of the global foreign exchange business. You can understand why the banks wouldn’t want to see those spreads narrowed further, especially if HFTs are grabbing a rising share of the volume.

If EBS makes the move to limit pipettes to only half pips, as proposed, that could have an impact on retail forex broker pricing. Exchange rates cascade down from the inter-bank market to the retail one, so any development at the top end where EBS operates is likely to filter its way to broker platforms. Not that it’s likely to have a major impact on most individual traders’ strategies.

The other thing EBS is looking to cut down on is the kind of quote stuffing that can lead to illusory liquidity. This quote stuffing happens when an HFT submits quotes/orders to the market really only to identify liquidity and feel out price direction. A high percentage of these orders are quickly cancelled. EBS wants to crack down on this, which could have an impact on price action. That may end up being the bigger thing to keep an eye one moving forward. If it tends to smooth out prices we could find forex becoming that much more interesting for that money flowing out of the stock market.

This month, we were very excited to learn that Currensee would be featured in the magazine Alternative Latin Investor. This bimonthly publication covers the alternative investing industry in the Latin American region. The Latin American (LatAm) markets are among the fastest growing areas for the industry globally.

What was most interesting about the piece was the perspective put on Currensee, as it was being observed through the eyes of the LatAm investment industry.

Titled “Currensee: The Next Step in Forex Trading,” the article began by explaining a few aspects of foreign currency trading that are alluring to the LatAm investing industry. Characteristics like the massive size and liquidity of the world currency market, the speed and flexibility in which transactions can be executed, and being aware of the potential to generate returns during times of volatility are all attracting LatAm investors to Forex.

The ALI’s article discusses two aspects of this program have been particularly appealing to LatAm investors: transparency and diversification.

Because Currensee began as a social network for Forex traders to collaborate, communication has always been an integral component of how Currensee operates. Though today the focus has shifted more towards the Trade Leaders program, communication is still there and it equates to a high level of transparency.

“What’s unique is that our customers can give one another permission to view their actual trading activity and performance… There’s a level of transparency beyond any alternative investment I know of,” says Currensee CEO Dave Lemont.

LatAm investors are also drawn to the program’s ability to achieve “double diversification.” What this means is that as an investor in the Trade Leaders Investment Program, investors benefit from asset class diversification in the Forex market as well as diversification in their individual accounts by choosing from a variety of Trade Leaders. This new method of diversifying is an exciting development for the world of investing.

The article drives home the points around diversification for all investors and the proof is in the numbers – the fact that from 2000-2010, the S&P 500 has dropped a cumulative 3.7%. That means if you’re one of the many who had been adhering strictly to the general 60% stocks/40% bonds rule of thumb, you ultimately lost out.

Lemont says: “The stock market is manipulated by big players and algorithmic traders on a daily basis. The foreign currency market is so much bigger: US$4 trillion a day, with 24-hour trading. We’re not going to get together and move the euro today. But we could get together and move the price of a small-cap stock.”

So although collaborating and trying to move the euro is not likely something investors can achieve, keeping a diversified portfolio is. Keep cool and keep it diversified.

-------

Be sure to read the full risk disclosure before trading Forex. Please note that Forex trading involves significant risk of loss. It is not suitable for all investors and you should make sure you understand the risks involved before trading. Performance, strategies and charts shown are not necessarily predictive of any particular result. And, as always, past performance is no indication of future results. Investor returns may vary from Trade Leader returns based on slippage, fees, broker spreads, volatility or other market conditions.