Copy trading adds a delay that scalping cannot afford

[Fairman]

Copy trading adds a delay that scalping cannot afford

A signal provider opens a trade. Subscribers are meant to get the same trade moments later. For a swing trade, a second or two does not matter. For a scalper targeting one or two pips, it can be the whole profit.

The delay comes from several places: the provider's order reaching the platform, the copying service detecting it, the order being sent to each follower's broker, and each broker filling it. Followers on slower or different brokers receive worse prices than the provider.

Spreads add another layer. The provider may have a raw spread account while followers pay a wider one, so the same trade costs more for them.

Results shown on the provider's page therefore overstate what followers receive. The gap grows with the number of followers, since a large batch of copied orders can itself move the price.

Anyone considering following a scalper should look for a history that includes followers' actual results, not just the provider's, and should start with small size to measure the difference.

A simple test is running a small live account in parallel with the signal and comparing the fills trade by trade. The gap shows exactly how much the copy process costs.

Has the follower's result ever differed sharply from the signal provider's?

[FXS HongKong Scalper]

Anyone considering following a scalper should look for a history that includes followers' actual results, not just the provider's, and should start with small size to measure the difference.

This is why copy trading and scalping mostly don't mix. For anyone looking at a signal service, comparing the provider's trade results with the subscriber's actual fills over a month shows the real cost. If targets are one or two pips, the difference tends to eat most of the edge.