Quick reality check for scalpers whose average hold is under a minute.
Some brokers are fine with it. Some quietly widen, reject, or “review” accounts that look like HFT noise. I’d rather know the policy before I optimize an M1 playbook.
What I’m trying to map
1. Stated scalping policy vs what actually happens after 2–4 weeks of sub-60s trades
2. Typical reject / requote behavior on market orders in London open
3. Whether hedging / opposite positions / rapid BE moves trigger flags
4. Any minimum stop distance / freeze level that makes sub-60s math impossible
My current filter
• If I can’t modify SL to BE when tape is fast, the broker fails the use-case — even if the website says “scalping allowed.”
• If average trade is 20–40s, I care more about reject rate + slippage p95 than about a 0.0 spread screenshot.
Drop your broker + roughly how short your average trade is (no account numbers). Curious which names still treat sub-60s as normal retail flow in 2026.
Not financial advice — execution discussion.
Average trade duration under 60s: which brokers still welcome that
-
LondonScalper
- Posts: 618
- Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2026 7:54 am
Re: Average trade duration under 60s: which brokers still welcome that
Hi traders, hi LondonScalper,
yes, you are right, some brokers have problem with scalping.
Especially STP brokers, who are not hedged against market makers in short time.
I have traded 7+ years with IC Markets and no problem at all.
yes, you are right, some brokers have problem with scalping.
Especially STP brokers, who are not hedged against market makers in short time.
I have traded 7+ years with IC Markets and no problem at all.
Preserve your own money. Scale with the market's money. Exponential growth is the ultimate key.
-
PropScalpDesk
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2026 7:50 pm
Re: Average trade duration under 60s: which brokers still welcome that
Sub-60s holds: read the broker policy cold
If average hold is under a minute, broker attitude matters as much as your pattern. Some books welcome it; some widen, reject, or quietly review accounts that look like noise. I map stated policy against what my deal history shows before I optimise an M1 playbook.
From Frankfurt I log reject rate, widening during my hold window, and any account emails that smell like activity review. Optimising entries on a venue that hates your hold time is unpaid research.
Rule: new broker or account type → micro size until the execution sample looks honest at your real duration.
I would rather slightly longer holds on a venue that fills cleanly than theoretically perfect thirty-second tickets on a venue that fights me. Execution regime is part of the strategy.
I ask support clear policy questions in writing before scaling. Vague “scalping allowed” marketing is not a contract with your hold-time distribution.
What warning sign showed up first when a venue disliked your sub-60s style — rejects, widening, or a “quality of execution” message?
If average hold is under a minute, broker attitude matters as much as your pattern. Some books welcome it; some widen, reject, or quietly review accounts that look like noise. I map stated policy against what my deal history shows before I optimise an M1 playbook.
From Frankfurt I log reject rate, widening during my hold window, and any account emails that smell like activity review. Optimising entries on a venue that hates your hold time is unpaid research.
Rule: new broker or account type → micro size until the execution sample looks honest at your real duration.
I would rather slightly longer holds on a venue that fills cleanly than theoretically perfect thirty-second tickets on a venue that fights me. Execution regime is part of the strategy.
I ask support clear policy questions in writing before scaling. Vague “scalping allowed” marketing is not a contract with your hold-time distribution.
What warning sign showed up first when a venue disliked your sub-60s style — rejects, widening, or a “quality of execution” message?