TradeInformer understands that MetaQuotes is pressuring props with broker ties to make a couple of key changes to the way they operate.
Firstly, firms must have a clear link between their prop arm and the brokerage business. In most instances this has meant having a shared URL with the company’s broker brand. Several providers confirmed independently that they have been asked to do this.
However, TradeInformer also understands there has been no precise details on how exactly firms should go about doing this. It’s also unclear what the thinking behind the demand is.
Some props have deliberately created their own brand as owners, for various reasons, have wanted to keep their prop and brokerage offerings separate. This has not been true across the board but the changes have made life more difficult for companies that have wanted to operate this way.
Another key change is that providers offering prop services using the MetaTrader platforms must also use a live server to offer prop accounts. This suggestion is probably more about MetaQuotes being able to monetise prop business. The company has not historically charged for demo accounts, meaning props – which almost all only use demo accounts – would not be making the company any money.
We’ve looked at MetaQuotes’ approach to props a few times before. The sense you get from the outside is that they are unhappy about the industry because (1) they have little oversight on who is using their products and (2) they don’t make any money from it.
Given the potential risks the industry creates, this effectively means MetaQuotes is in a position where it gains nothing but has a huge amount to lose if props behave poorly and end up damaging the MetaQuotes brand. That being the case, the steps the company has taken seem aimed at rectifying this – firstly by giving them greater oversight on who is using their technology and secondly by making money from it.
