I want to bring to emphasize a continuous debate I have with myself and I have seen others have various viewpoints on. It's in regard to the way to measure increase or reduction in a non-biased style. I am not speaking. Someone making $10k does'better' than someone but when it took $1mil to earn this $10k, and the guy that is $ 1k utilized only $1k to make hisor her who would you trust with your cash? It appears to me that traders and speculators of all sorts take the account size as a foundation for their 100%. While this is logical for a more traditional approach to investing it appears to fall short of distributing Foreign Exchange dynamics.

I believe that leveraged margin utilized seems closer to just how much'cash' I am using to start the position. So whether it is a mini or a full lot, or 10 lots, it symbolizes exactly the exact same thing. Whether the account is 1k or $100k the percentage of used margin levels the playing area for quantifying progress. That is just my own spin on it.

If I really take it to a counting nuts standpoint to it. If I only'invest' 30'nuts' on one lot and the price moves 5 pennies in my favor in a few weeks I am up 5000'nuts'. With the essence of currency exchange and the leverage you do not actually spend that used margin amount to produce the yield, you only really spend the spread. After that you're in the green. . .er, shameful. That actually is not as representitive of this margin utilized but dam that percentage appears assssstronomical!

That is why I believe margin used is simply perfect!

Whut does ya'll think?

Woop woop! Many choices allowed and votes will be shown!