[OFFICIAL]Bitfinex.com first Bitcoin P2P lending platform for leverage trading

[superbit]

I'm not as sure about the correction but better to be safe then sorry.  I know that bitfinex used to be able to relay through GOX, but it had to be stopped because of the timing with money etc..

What about introducing it again but as a sell only option and only IF BTC drops X % in an hour.  It would just be an added layer of security in the case of a flash correction.  Any other exchanges on the horizon.

[oda.krell]

Well, might as well be the first to say it:

I don't like it.

I remember, the first time when I read about bitfinex, the maximum leverage advertised was 5:1. In fact, there are still places on bitfinex where that ratio is mentioned, e.g. here.

When I finally signed up a few weeks ago, the 5:1 ratio already wasn't available anymore. Fine, I though, maybe too risky for such a volatile market. But now you're reducing it further, and I simply don't see why.

We already have the distincion between "insured" and "uninsured" loans, so the lender are aware (or should be aware) that, in the worst case, they might lose some or most of their money.

Why decide *for us* that it is too risky if, effectively, bitfinex doesn't need to participate in the risk anyway?

...

Okay, and here's my biggest gripe: The justification is: "due to the recent market performance we believe a correction is due, sooner or later."

What the hell?

Would you please let *us*, the traders decide if we think we're in a for a correction or not?

Seriously, I've only had positive experiences on my (short) time on bitfinex now, but this is the first time I'm officially miffed.

I really, really don't want my exchange telling me that "we're in for a correction, so we're taking things back a notch."

Hope you can understand where I'm coming from. I understand where *you* are coming from (security > profit, you've said so several times), but with that decision, and especially the *justification* of that decision, you went to far in your goal to put security before profit, IMO.

[unclescrooge]

Hello everyone,

One completely different question:

For obvious reasons, I prefer using NoScript when engaging in trading

I noticed that bitfinex makes use of objects from external sources, e.g. googleusercontent.

It's not terrible per se, but I would rather only allow objects from bitfinex itself. I noticed I can make use of the website with googleusercontent disabled, but some minor glitches appear. Any chance you can unify all scripts on bitfinex's own domain?

I'm using NoScript too so I was a bit bothered when the new front-end was delivered. I will see what I can do, although I do think it's safe if you authorize googleusercontent scripts, unless you really don't want anything google (which I can understand).

Thanks

I think they will eventually bring one in, but I agree, even just to add a bit more liquidity and do a test run throw 10K at one and see how it goes.

We don't promise everything, although yes, I would be good to have at least one more exchange

About the leverage restrictions, traders are already less leveraged than in April so I'm quite confident, previous crashes from last month went smoothly (not sure about the correction either, at least not at this low price). But better safe than sorry. Although loans are uninsured by default, we don't want lenders to suffer a loss in fact

I don't think the demand for USD went down, it's more the offer that got really abundant this time.

Anyway, have a good day all
Raphael
Bitfinex team

[SkRRJyTC]

Dear Customers

due to the recent market performance we believe a correction is due, sooner or later.
We don't know whether the price will touch 500$ or 1.000$ or even go higher ( we all hope so) before that.
What we know for sure is that the total amount of leveraged positions is getting bigger and bigger.
On one hand we love that, but on the other hand we understand risk and we decided to limit the maximum leverage to 2:1 for the time being.
Only new orders will be effected, leveraged positions already in place will not be subject to any change.
We do that in order to preserve our activity, but also the one of our traders.
Last but not least the big april market crash is only 7 months away and we try to learn from our mistakes.
If the volatility comes down, we will put it back to where it was.

I hope you have all a good trading day

Giancarlo
Bitfinex Team

2:1 isnt worth my time, too much risk and not enough reward...  Ive been BFX trader since the very early days, it would be sad to no longer trade on BFX.

Please fix this.  Perhaps allow grandfathered accounts a higher leverage setting?

EDIT:  Anyway BFX can calm my insolvency worries?  This change doesnt smell good...

[superbit]

Dear Customers

due to the recent market performance we believe a correction is due, sooner or later.
We don't know whether the price will touch 500$ or 1.000$ or even go higher ( we all hope so) before that.
What we know for sure is that the total amount of leveraged positions is getting bigger and bigger.
On one hand we love that, but on the other hand we understand risk and we decided to limit the maximum leverage to 2:1 for the time being.
Only new orders will be effected, leveraged positions already in place will not be subject to any change.
We do that in order to preserve our activity, but also the one of our traders.
Last but not least the big april market crash is only 7 months away and we try to learn from our mistakes.
If the volatility comes down, we will put it back to where it was.

I hope you have all a good trading day

Giancarlo
Bitfinex Team

2:1 isnt worth my time, too much risk and not enough reward...  Ive been BFX trader since the very early days, it would be sad to no longer trade on BFX.

Please fix this.  Perhaps allow grandfathered accounts a higher leverage setting?

EDIT:  Anyway BFX can calm my insolvency worries?  This change doesnt smell good...

I'm not worried about the change itself, but it does make sense to let the traders make the risk call.

[SkRRJyTC]

Dear Customers

due to the recent market performance we believe a correction is due, sooner or later.
We don't know whether the price will touch 500$ or 1.000$ or even go higher ( we all hope so) before that.
What we know for sure is that the total amount of leveraged positions is getting bigger and bigger.
On one hand we love that, but on the other hand we understand risk and we decided to limit the maximum leverage to 2:1 for the time being.
Only new orders will be effected, leveraged positions already in place will not be subject to any change.
We do that in order to preserve our activity, but also the one of our traders.
Last but not least the big april market crash is only 7 months away and we try to learn from our mistakes.
If the volatility comes down, we will put it back to where it was.

I hope you have all a good trading day

Giancarlo
Bitfinex Team

2:1 isnt worth my time, too much risk and not enough reward...  Ive been BFX trader since the very early days, it would be sad to no longer trade on BFX.

Please fix this.  Perhaps allow grandfathered accounts a higher leverage setting?

EDIT:  Anyway BFX can calm my insolvency worries?  This change doesnt smell good...

I'm not worried about the change itself, but it does make sense to let the traders make the risk call.

IMO BFX would not have made this change unless they deemed it necessary.  It is obviously going to lose them business.

So the question is, why is it necessary?

[superbit]

Are there other sites where you can get greater than 2:1 leverage?

[01BTC10]

Are there other sites where you can get greater than 2:1 leverage?
[/quot
1broker but the spread and interest are high and limit is low. Unfortunately, I tried to make a trade earlier and the market is closed.

I'm not very happy about the lower leverage on Bitfinex buy I guess they have good reasons.

[superbit]

I mean, I do agree with the better safe than sorry approach, especially with everything that has gone on in the last month.  Maybe they could play with the leverage and margin requirements and come up with a better happy medium.

The obvious risk is a flash crash forcing margins.  Is there enough liquidity with the internal exchange and bitstamp.  I don't leverage trade very often and for the most part I am a lender.  I don't like the sounds of lenders not wanting to use the site anymore, but I don't fully understand the logic, while it may limit potential profit it's still better than trading 1:1 direct on the exchanges.

[SkRRJyTC]

I mean, I do agree with the better safe than sorry approach, especially with everything that has gone on in the last month.  Maybe they could play with the leverage and margin requirements and come up with a better happy medium.

The obvious risk is a flash crash forcing margins.  Is there enough liquidity with the internal exchange and bitstamp.  I don't leverage trade very often and for the most part I am a lender.  I don't like the sounds of lenders not wanting to use the site anymore, but I don't fully understand the logic, while it may limit potential profit it's still better than trading 1:1 direct on the exchanges.

I would much rather trade 1:1 than 2:1.  

Trade fees and loan interest take up a significant portion of your gains at 2:1 but your losses are still accelerated.

I feel like the advantages of leverage are lost at 2:1 but the risks are still there.

[superbit]

I mean, I do agree with the better safe than sorry approach, especially with everything that has gone on in the last month.  Maybe they could play with the leverage and margin requirements and come up with a better happy medium.

The obvious risk is a flash crash forcing margins.  Is there enough liquidity with the internal exchange and bitstamp.  I don't leverage trade very often and for the most part I am a lender.  I don't like the sounds of lenders not wanting to use the site anymore, but I don't fully understand the logic, while it may limit potential profit it's still better than trading 1:1 direct on the exchanges.

I would much rather trade 1:1 than 2:1. 

Trade fees and loan interest take up a significant portion of your gains at 2:1 but your losses are still accelerated.

I feel like the advantages of leverage are lost at 2:1 but the risks are still there.

That doesn't make sense, the fees and borrowing interest are the same on the leverage portion of the money be it 2:1 or 10:1 as they are percentage based.

I can see the risk reward argument I suppose though, because in a flash crash if you lose its not all your money, but if it gains it is all yours.

[SkRRJyTC]

I mean, I do agree with the better safe than sorry approach, especially with everything that has gone on in the last month.  Maybe they could play with the leverage and margin requirements and come up with a better happy medium.

The obvious risk is a flash crash forcing margins.  Is there enough liquidity with the internal exchange and bitstamp.  I don't leverage trade very often and for the most part I am a lender.  I don't like the sounds of lenders not wanting to use the site anymore, but I don't fully understand the logic, while it may limit potential profit it's still better than trading 1:1 direct on the exchanges.

I would much rather trade 1:1 than 2:1.  

Trade fees and loan interest take up a significant portion of your gains at 2:1 but your losses are still accelerated.

I feel like the advantages of leverage are lost at 2:1 but the risks are still there.

That doesn't make sense, the fees and borrowing interest are the same on the leverage portion of the money be it 2:1 or 10:1 as they are percentage based.

I can see the risk reward argument I suppose though, because in a flash crash if you lose its not all your money, but if it gains it is all yours.

Good point about the fees and interest.  Turns out Im not the brightest.

I still dont like it.

I had a 4:1 long last night.  If I knew about this I wouldnt have realized the profits.  Now I could only repoen half that position.  Shitty.

[bizz]

Are there other sites where you can get greater than 2:1 leverage?

BTC-e has 3:1 leverage on MT4 platform.

Plus500 has CFD with 7:1. Only fiat. And I don't think they accept US citizens.

[meh32123]

Bitcoin isn't volatile at all!!!  its steady at 300 for hours...

[superbit]

Doesn't look like the change is a popular one?  Any chance of reverting this back?

[8fold]

I am ok with the change, as long as you don't keep it more than necesarry. You're doing a good job so far. Also, Raphy, is that No Script (google issue) something to worry about?

[oda.krell]

I am ok with the change, as long as you don't keep it more than necesarry. You're doing a good job so far. Also, Raphy, is that No Script (google issue) something to worry about?

since I brought it up (in my question), hope it's okay if I (try to) answer it:

No, absolutely nothing to worry about. It's just about maximizing the security on *your own* side. I trade only in a Linux environment, since it's safer than Windows. And for that reason, I use the NoScript addon.

But in order to see the bitfinex webpage in all of its beauty, I would have to allow NoScript to run content from googleuserscontent. In particular, it seems some page fonts are stored there. Nothing essential.

In summary: if you're as concerned about maximizing security as I am, get NoScript, and *don't* allow googleusercontent. The site will look a bit worse, but trading still works. If you didn't use NoScript anyway, nothing changes

[8fold]

I am ok with the change, as long as you don't keep it more than necesarry. You're doing a good job so far. Also, Raphy, is that No Script (google issue) something to worry about?

In summary: if you're as concerned about maximizing security as I am, get NoScript, and *don't* allow googleusercontent. The site will look a bit worse, but trading still works. If you didn't use NoScript anyway, nothing changes

Thanks, I'll take a look into it.

[capoeira]

Are there other sites where you can get greater than 2:1 leverage?

BTC-e has 3:1 leverage on MT4 platform.

Plus500 has CFD with 7:1. Only fiat. And I don't think they accept US citizens.

BTC-E on MT4 is also only Fiat. So you wont have more leverage than trading 2:1 with BTC at Finex (at least on a long position)

[Sukrim]

I also would expect Bitfinex to push more BTC to Bitstamp in case they think a correction is near rather than narrowing the margin (is 2:1 even worth the hassle to select where to lend from etc. compared to just do a 1:1 trade and be done with it?) to be able to sell into the correction as quickly as possible once positions get liquidated. Also they might increase margin requirements (e.g. 15% instead of 10%) if they are afraid that they are not able to sell fast enough.

I would be happy to lend my money to someone trading 10:1 with 10% margin, if I am assured that Bitfinex has a proper connection and a dedicated server monitoring prices and trading on Bitstamp (ideally on a VPN, whitelisted by any firewall/load balancer from Bitstamp side).
I might charge high(er) interest, like about 1-2% per day for the higher risk though.

It sucks that there seems to be no way for me (aside from private deals) to allow people who want to, to take this lending offer. Maybe we could also specify not only the lending duration (a not so good concept anyways, in my opinion...) and rate but also the max. leverage we allow our borrowers to take, maybe even up to more ridiculous ones like 20:1 - there the current margin requirement alone though would anyways not allow this...

If you get nervous, just up the margin requirement (in the current case it would be 50%) for new positions and deal with the protests from traders and lenders. Removing options however is not so cool in my opinion.

Also, why is the margin on BTC also reduced? It would make more sense in my opinion to even increase it there, as this would counterbalance your potential losses if you can't sell BTC fast enough. It seems you are more afraid of people dumping BTCs than someone suddenly buying up 10 million USD of coins with a market order...

About trading on margin elsewhere:
Kraken wants to allow trading on margin once they have more volume - unfortunately they seem to have weird developers which don't like bots so the API sucks as it is binning data unnecessarily. It might be enough for some more general arbitrage scripts but I doubt that anyone will write liquidity providing bots for that unprecise mess soon until they get their act together there.
There is always the chance to do the lending manually, but then again there is a VERY high need for trust - I wouldn't do that without a written contract and meeting anyone that wants to do that in person before transferring any funds in USD or BTC.

On a different note:
Please publish audits, if (when!) you do them, it is quite vital for people to see that you are actually able to cover the funds deposited and a positive audit statement from an independent 3rd party is definitely helping there. If you don't have any to publish, please consider doing one as soon as possible.