lol this has made the emulsion paint in my eye pain a lot better
do you understand how trading platforms/exchanges work? you are being emotional with a price fluctuation. if price had plummeted during the night and you where in an instant negative would you accuse t212 of this also?
there are other trading platforms using different prices. the tech glitch with Frankfurt unfortunately stopped us cashing in on the momentum and consequently lead to a further decline in its price
@Andre Why are you attacking him? Edit: their post now deleted.
You choose to trade a very volatile stock. You know to only bet what you are prepared to lose. Its just very unlucky for the German exchange to go down, out of 366 days this year we probably wonāt see it again.
Nobody wants to lose out from making profit, or have it fall below where they bought in, but you have to suck it up. Sorry if that sounds harsh. If youāve been trading for any time youāll know you wonāt get the price in the past.
If you take a step back and look at what has been said with head instead of heart it should make perfect sense.
Do you please know whether the XETRA will close at 17,29 also today or they will allow traders to trade for longer due to the technical issue they had?
I donāt understand how hard it is to differentiate between wrongly executed orders and not executed orders that would be great for the users if they would. You have every right to ask corrections if the execution is not correct but why would broker (or the stock exchange) would pay you for an execution that did not happen at the first place? Broker is only responsible for providing the best execution price if the execution happens. It is not guaranteed that an order would instantly happen or that the price will not fluctuate at the instant of execution.
One can get frustrated when e.g. orders not going for half an hour after the stock exchange opening, and may prefer another broker if they provide better executions, but asking for reimbursements for not executed would-have-been-great orders seems odd to me.
I donāt mean to be rudeā¦ but I seriously think people need to pass a test to be allowed into the stock marketā¦ you know, basic knowledge on how everything works.
Have to question how folk get past the CFD questions when first entering that side of the platform for the first time, although Google open on another tab is probably the answer more times than not.
Yeah. I was let in at my own risk, so to speak, as divulged that I have no prior experience but valid qualifications.
I have no intention of using CFD until Iāve done some training and understand it fully. But use it for charts and plotting strategy. Itās useful for that.
But back to the point, yes, not hard for someone to fake it.
I understand the volatility of the stock I invested in and that Trading 212 is a cheap platform to do such trading. However, I set a stop loss at 5.575 and they chose to ignore that and instead gave me a stop loss at 4.988. Please explain!?
A stop loss is just a trigger point for placing a market order on your behalf. By the time it executed the best price available was 4.988
I assume it was falling fairly fast.
If you are talking about open you can see it gap down here.
Basically a 5.575 stop loss was way too tight unless you were really very confident it was only going up from 5.7
Stop losses need to be way outside the range of play or they will take you out. Even more so on volatile stocks. I would only be confident setting a 5.5 if I had watched it clear min 7.5 and still going north.
In hindsight removing the stop would have been best, or using stop limit with the stop at 5.575 and setting the limit to say 5.4. That would meant you would have got a min of 5.4 when it bounced.
I would run without a stop limit in reality as more often you want out at whatever is the best available. And a stop limit would stuff you if it kept falling down and would never execute.
should be interviewed instead 
