I am using Etoro to trade US stocks and they charge overnight fees. However, nowhere can I find a definition of what an overnight fee in the context of stock broking is. Their Terms &amp; Conditions only state that they charge an overnight fee and an internet search for overnight fees only delivers results for postal services.  Is an overnight fee the fee charged to the client for accepting orders while the market is closed, or is it charged on all stock holdings, i.e. a daily charge for open positions?
121776
I'm trying to learn about stock markets. I eventually want to invest a small amount over a long period. Yet, I notice on a lot of broker sites that they tend to charge an overnight fee for any stocks held over night. I presume this is every night thereafter?  I just wondered because it seems like a wall when you want to let your stock price grow, and an overnight charge eats into this. or, is this only the case for "CFD" stocks? I'm confused.  Any help?  Cheers
80220
Stock A has a bid price of $100.08, an ask price of $100.10 and a last trade price of $100.  I take that to mean that if I buy the stock at $100.10 then I will have lost a total of two cents. How does a person make a profit when buying and selling stock?  Do I wait until the bid price is higher than the ask price that I paid? I hope that I don't confuse anybody because I'm pretty confused myself.
40308
My son is a freshman this year.  We live in and he attends school in California.  We pulled out the first $ from our Utah 529 plan.  I had the money deposited in my account since I paid the registration and dorm &amp; meal plan.  Our friend has a son a year ahead and he has the exact same 529 plan.  He warned me that he got hit with a small tax penalty when he withdrew the money to his account and not to an account in his son's name.  I called the 529 administrator and they said it shouldn't matter either way.  Other online blogs agree.  They say the only difference is that my son would get the tax forms and have to file if it went to his account. Nevertheless, my friend did get a penalty.  Any clarity would be appreciated!
14145
I'm a non-US citizen, and not residing in US, who uses an online brokerage firm to trade US stocks and options. Are my capital gains (short term and long term) and dividends subject to taxes? If yes, what are those taxes?
25862
Although it is company-specific, what are your experiences when contributing to ESPP (Employee Stock Program)?   More specifically, do you recommend contributing to ESPP in max? Or maybe it is only worth during certain times throughout the year? (stock prices are usually higher during Spring/Summer times!)  I work in a big cable company in the US. Kind of stable company. My company rules:  10% of salary with 15% discount, happening quarterly, vesting after a year from purchase
120332
I shorted a particular stock which resulted in $10,000 being deposited into my Interactive Brokers account. I then put all of that $10,000 into VTI (total stock market index). Basically making the bet that the stock I shorted will perform worse than the total stock market.   I assumed I would be charged some sort of interest or fees for using that money, however it appears that I am not being charged at all. Are there really no costs for doing this?
88084
Is the ex-dividend date linked to the time zone of the market it is bought at? Let's imagine an American firms stock traded at NASDAQ and a German market, the ex-Dividend day being the 1st February. This announcement is made on their American website, without specifying a time zone. I want to get the dividend.  1) The German market opens at 8am on February 1st local time, which would be 2am on February 1st New York time. I sell my shares at 8am. So the trade would have been made on ex-dividend day, with NASDAQ being closed. Will I get the dividend?  2) Let's imagine a bigger time difference, where the market I sell the stock is 8am in the morning of February 1st local time, but New York Time is sill 11pm on January 31. Will I get the dividend?   Or phrased differently, is the Ex-dividend linked to a date, independent of time zones, or is it linked to a local time zone?
64716
Would you please rephrase this so I can better understand it?  The money could be paid as early as next week.  What other meanings might &quot;as early as&quot; take on in different situations or circumstances? Does &quot;early&quot; in these examples mean the same as it does in the previous example?  Early booking is essential. as space is limited. I wake up as early as 6 o'clock I wake up at 6 o'clock
77152
Are there any securities traded on the stock market (i.e. ETPs) that never decrease in value?    As an aside (in case anyone mentions bonds):  I'm aware there's ETFs for AAA-rated government bonds, but even these dip significantly.  For example, the  has dipped by 9% in a 85-day period before (21/08/2016 to 13/11/2016).
101704
I have a 10 stock portfolio and considering market conditions that are on the rise when this question in being asked, a few of them did hit their 52-week high price.  I would like to call myself a long term investor and I do not like to trade so much. If I take "Buy low sell high" as gospel then this is in my opinion a good selling position.  On one hand, I think I should lock my profit because stocks don't hit a 52-week high every day, but on the other hand, there is nothing wrong with the company and it is very well positioned to go up even further.  Any suggestions?
123534
The only reason why I put it here is to find out whether I am a victim or just ignorant of the way brokers deal with option positions that were exercised. Whether I am a victim or just ignorant depends on the answer that I posted here. The facts are: I had a 2 SHORT QS Option at 75 which was exercised against me on the 23 Dec 00.45 AM and I later exercised my 2 LONG QS Option at 70 on 23 Dec 9.31 AM. The broker charged me Borrow Fee for 24-27 Dec for $1102, which means instead of getting $1000 profit I turn this into a loss of $102 plus comm. My question:  Since both long and short options were exercised on the same day one at 45 mins on 23 Dec and the later at 9.31 am on the same day, how can there be a SHORT POSITION in the stocks since both are net-off in my account ?  The answer I got from my broker and this is the point that I want to clarify.  The response I got from IB was that the initial exercise at 45 mins on 23 Dec was actually on 22 Dec (not 23 as I alleged). They refused to show me how they got 22 Dec.  This is my explanation to my Broker in reply.  Even if the short call and long call was exercised on different dates 22 and 23 Dec respectively, IB can only charge me for the SHORT position for one day and not from 24-27 Dec by ignoring my long call position was not there.  Further Facts:  My Broker ignored my answer and insisted the dates are correct and therefore I was charged to borrow shares that was need to satisfy the short position on exercised. So I am lost as I do not know whether the broker is correct and they can do this by ignoring my long call position after exercised or there is something they had not tell me. That is the reason I came to this site soliciting answers from those who know more than I do or had experienced the same.  I hope I have explained this clearly now and why would I want to give an opinion when I am looking for an answer ?
65610
An example would be Cardno Ltd which has:   CDD.AX -  CDDN.AX -    I can see that the CDDN has no updated info... does that mean its not active? But will there ever be a time when a company has 2 or more active listings on the same exchange? If yes, what would be the difference?  Please note that I do not have a full/official background for trading/financial markets.
13040
After a company has issued shares, why should it care if the value of the shares fluctuate? Since the shares are now publicly traded, if the value fluctuates, that is strictly a transaction between buyer and seller, none of whom are directly related to the company. E.g. if I sell X an iPhone for $100, why should I care if X is selling the iPhone to Y for 1 dollar or 1000 dollars? I have got my $100, so I need not bother. No?
88458
Note: This question is erroneously marked as a duplicate. It concerns a very specific situation with unfulfillable market orders in very illiquid markets, one that no other discussion here has covered. Related questions are addressed at the end.  TL;DR This is the entire order book:  __________________________________________________ |___________Buy__________|__________Sell__________| |  Time |  Price | Quant |  Time |  Price | Quant | |       |        |       | 10:05 | market |   1   | |       |        |       | 10:00 | $10.00 |   1   | |_______|________|_______|_______|________|_______|   There's an incoming buy order for 1 share, limit price $11. Which order gets matched and at what price?    With the above order book, if someone came in and placed a buy order for 1 share at limit price $9, I assume it matches the market order and trade is executed at $9. Straightforward. If instead the buyer placed a buy order with limit price $11, would it match the limit order or the market order?  Answering by determining "price" of unfulfilled market order  When the incoming order is a market order and there are only limit orders on the books, it's clear how to price it: based on the best bid or ask. But that doesn't help us here.  One option is that if we can figure out what to consider as the "price" for the unfulfilled market order on the books, we can decide based on price/time priority.  The possibilities are:   Price market order at best ask: $10. Now we have two orders at the same price, so the earlier-placed one gets it: the limit order. But this seems unfair. The trader placing the market order is clearly willing to go below $10, so they should get the trade! Price market order at best bid: $11 or undefined? On the one hand, the incoming buy order is at $11, but on the other hand, by definition an incoming order isn't on the books yet, so there is no "best ask". If it were $11, the buy order would be matched with the $10 limit order, even if the market order had been placed first! Seems unfair that an earlier-placed market order would lose out to a limit order. Price market order at last traded price: let's say $11. Again the market order would unfairly lose out to the limit order here. Price market order at $0.01 better than best ask: $9.99. Okay, this works. But we can't simply treat it as limit price $9.99 because this market order would match an incoming buy order with limit price $9.   Always matching market orders first  As @Dheer's answer suggests, one approach is to simply match market orders first no matter what. This makes a lot of sense, though we still need to figure out at what price does the trade executes. Clearly not the buyer's limit price of $11, because they'd get a worse deal than the limit order on the books. So, $10? $9.99? Last trade price, or opening price (but no more than $10)?  What if the incoming buyer placed a market order instead. At what price do you match two market orders - same as the answer to the above?  I guess this comes down to specifications for individual exchanges, but I'm wondering if there's a standard here or a way to approach it from basic rules that clears up all these situations.    Edit: Some specifics of how limit orders are matched is discussed at  This question is not a duplicate of that - my question is specifically about how an incoming limit order is matched when the other side of the order book has an unfulfilled market order. This case is not discussed at all by various existing questions, which only discuss matching incoming orders when there are sufficient limit orders already on the books.  Other relevant discussions that don't directly address these questions but are good background reading:         Another edit:  According to this answer , some or all markets will reject incoming market orders if there are no orders on the books to match it to, so the situation I describe in this question wouldn't be possible in the first place. I don't have any sources to back this up but if someone can confirm or contradict this we can probably settle this question.
109968
I have little knowledge about futures contracts. The recent negative price of crude oil spurred my curiosity about this stuff.   I read this post about .  According to this post, when I buy a futures contract, I enter into a contractual agreement to buy some commodity on some future date, and I only need to pay a 2% initial margin.   Suppose the price of the commodity does not fluctuate but I change my mind and decide not to buy the commodity at maturity. What punishment could be exerted on me?   I do not want the 2% initial margin back because that is a little money compared to the real value of the commodity. If there is no extra penalty, it would be unfair for the seller — imagine the seller transports 1000 barrels of crude oil to your front door and you say "I do not need it any more, please take it away, thank you!"  Update: I did more research about this and have more questions.  If I buy a futures contract at $10 and the price of the contract drops to -$37 at the last trading day, at which price should I buy the commodity at the delivery day, $10 or -$37?   There seems not just one contract I enter into when I buy a futures contract: the original futures contract between me and the seller of the commodity(or the exchange?), the contract between me and my brokerage, the contract between the brokerage and the exchange. I'm not clear about the exact entities of each contract and the obligations involved in each contract. The contracts seem contradictory with each other, e.g., my brokerage may forcefully sell my futures contract if my account balance is not enough, which will prevent me from fulfilling the obligations in the futures contract, i.e., receiving the commodity on future date.  If I(or an institutional trader) trade directly (not via a brokerage) with an exchange(does CME accept individual traders?), does the exchange have the rights to forcefully sell my contracts at the last trading day at any price or close my position at the settlement price(say -$37)? If the exchange does so thus letting me own $5,000M to it, is it more justice for me to sue the exchange rather than let the exchange sue me? If I could hold the position, the loss caused by my not executing the delivery/receipt of the commodity may be less than $5,000M. Of course, the loss will be determined by the court, not by the exchange according to the settlement price formed by itself or a few possible conspirators.
17155
As a follow up to my other , I would like to know whether the following is possible:  I have $20,000 in my brokerage account The price of a call option with $300 strike price is $5.00 (1 contract = 100 shares) I buy 20 contracts of these $300 calls (cost is 20 * 5 * 100 = $10,000) The price of the underlying goes up, making my option in-the-money  I decide to exercise my options. Exercising my calls means that I buy 20 * 100 = 2,000 shares of the underlying at $300 per share. However, I only have $10,000 left in my brokerage account and am unable to pay for the shares (2,000 * 300 = $600,000). What now? How does this work? Do brokers recognize that my position is profitable, and buy and sell the underlying for me as soon as I exercise my calls? In other words, do I need to worry about being able to pay for the shares of the underlying if I decide to exercise my options? Can I just take my profit without bothering with the shares at all?
71987
Suppose I sold an option on stock X, with strike price Y, and expiry date Z. Suppose I later buy an option on the same stock, with the same strike price, and the same expiry date. Do these two positions cancel out each other (i.e. both contracts cease to exist anywhere), or will I end up with two separate contracts?  Is it the same with the reverse situation? e.g. I bought an option on stock A, with strike price B, and expiry date C. If I later sell an option on the same stock, with the same strike price and expiry date, will I end up with two contracts (one long position, one short position)?