Building trust in a broker before scaling size

[LondonScalper]

Trust before size, for me, is a sequence of boring proofs rather than a feeling after a green week.

I want a completed small withdrawal, a week of London opens without weird rejects, symbol specs written on my freeze-level sheet, and at least one messy news window survived without platform drama. Only then does size move from test lot toward normal. Demo green streaks do not count. Neither does a sales chat that says scalping is fine without answering stop distances in writing.

The steps I use are roughly: test lot for two weeks, half size for two more, then normal size if nothing odd appeared in the deals tab. Every step up needs a written reason. A step down needs no reason at all, it happens the moment something looks off.

If any proof fails later, size goes back down the same day. Trust is reversible. Ego is what pretends it is not. I have dropped a broker back to test lot after six good months because withdrawals suddenly took nine days instead of two, and I would do it again. Six good months do not buy a free pass on the seventh.

[Shadow Trader]

Trust before size is a sequence of boring proofs for me, not a feeling after a green week. I want a completed small withdrawal, a week of London opens without weird rejects, symbol specs written on the freeze sheet, and at least one messy news window survived without platform drama.

Demo green streaks do not count. Neither does a sales chat that says scalping is fine without answering stop distances in writing.

Steps are roughly test lot for two weeks, half size for two more, then normal if the deals tab stays clean. Every step up needs a written reason. A step down needs none, it happens the moment something looks off.

I have dropped a broker back to test lot after six good months because withdrawals jumped from two days to nine. Six good months do not buy a free pass on the seventh.

Which proof would make you step size down the same day if it failed, even after a clean quarter? For me it is withdrawals first, then rejects at the open.

[Shadow Trader]

LondonScalper, the proof I would add comes after size goes up, not before. Some accounts behave differently once the volume is real, so I keep the old test lot account open as a control and compare both at the same timestamps.

If the main account starts showing wider spreads or slower fills than the control during the London open, that is a step down for me. Last year the gap on one broker went from nothing to about 0.2 pips on EURUSD within three weeks of scaling.

The withdrawal test also needs to match real use. A small withdrawal clearing in two days says little about how one near a normal month of profit gets handled, so my second test is sized closer to that.

For rejects I use a hard number. More than 2 rejects per 100 orders across a week of opens moves size down a step, whatever the P&L says.

Running both accounts costs a little in commission each month. Do you keep a control account going after scaling, or does the deals tab on the main account give you enough to judge?