I tried Zorro with FXCM demo account and was impressed. Very reliable connection/re-connection when even FXCM's own software crashed from time to time due to weekends etc. Thanks for the great software.

Hopefully what I'll discuss below is not off topic.

It is clearly documented that current Z systems are not optimized for IB, and IB's low leverage seems to be a major reason. However, just when I was researching which FX broker to use among FXCM, OANDA, and IB, I stumbled upon this piece: Exclusive: Q1 US Retail Traders Profitab...ders in the US.

It shows that for Q1 2016 and nearly every quarter all the way back to Q1 2012 (see links to Previous Reports at bottom of the report webpage), IB ranks 1st in terms of the proportion of retail FX accounts that are profitable - the percentage hangs around 45% which is pretty decent, considering it is often said that majority of retail traders would lose. OANDA is often ranking #2 or #3 (for one time, Q2 2014, OANDA was #1, beating IB by 1.4%). FXCM is usually further down by several positions.

I cannot verify the technical accuracy of this report; nor do I have any idea why this would be the case: is it because IB has on average lower cost for its retail customers? Or IB has better execution? Better risk control? Or lower leverage actually helped in the long run (so less customers blow up their account and never come back)? Or IB accounts have lower volatility so they stay positive more often but actually they could have worse compound growth rate? Or maybe the reason lies in the customers themselves - those who trade at IB are statistically different than those who trade at other brokers?

But anyway, if we can take this report at face value, wouldn't it be meaningful to develop some new Z system(s) that favor IB? Or, if some of us want to develop systems using Zorro for IB, what suggestions/advice could we use to improve the chance of success?

An extra thought: the Swiss Franc scare in Jan 2015 did give me pause when I think about trading at FXCM, which is FX only and allows very high leverage, therefore the whole company was at brink of collapse and required external rescue at that time. If the company did collapse, my understanding is all retail accounts would sink with it (we wouldn't rank high in the queue to get repaid from the company's liquidation, would we?) OANDA seems more conservative and even forgave some negative accounts during that event, but it's not publicly traded so there's less transparency about its financial health. IB on the other hand is publicly traded, huge and diversified (therefore I believe with all the stock and ETF brokerage and other pure service business IB's total exposure to leverage must be way below any FX-only broker). So in terms of financial stability during a black swan event or full-blown financial crisis, I'd think IB should be much better than both OANDA and FXCM.

Thanks!
-Zhong