Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Tasuki

Forex Bad on Tradestation

Recommended Posts

Hello folks,

Yet another warning about problems with Tradestation, this time having to do with Forex. Apparently there are two problems, both very serious:

1) people who have compared the quality of the Forex data between Tradestation and eSignal have found that TS Forex data is very poor quality

Here is a quote from a friend who did the research:

 

"Tradetsation uses GAIN Capital (who also run forex.com) for their FX feed/execution. They use a polled feed and therefore only provide a small window as to what FX trades exist. Don't believe me? Try comparing your high/low for the day or a spike high/low against a trader friend that has an aggregated feed like eSignal's paid feed. I am regularly seeing a 2-12 tick (yes 12 ticks!) difference. Now think about what this means to a pitchfork if the A, B or C pivot is 10 ticks from reality. 30-60 bars from now the difference may be 50 ticks."

 

2) Trade execution is very poor with GAIN Capital. These jokers will:

a) give you a bad fill

b) take the other side of the trade and screw you.

 

As always, caveat emptor.

Tasuki

 

p.s. addendum: GAIN uses a "polled" feed, meaning that they display only a fraction of the market. They "poll" it, taking samples at discrete intervals, which misses all the ticks in between their sampling times. The reason for this is obvious--if you only take samples of the data, it requires much less bandwidth, saving GAIN alot of money. The opposite of this would be an "aggregated" feed, which is comprised of data from multiple market makers. That's what you get with eSignal, apparently.

Edited by Tasuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure the problem is that its 'polled'. (though what do I know!!) Spot FX data is based on changes in bid/ask there is no actual trade data. The fact that Esignal get feeds from several networks mean they get a richer set of bid ask data and certainly many more 'ticks'. (remember a tick is a change in bid or ask not a trade). It's like comparing prices on Nasdaq to prices on a single Nas ECN. They will be close but unless the single ECN is currently best bid and best ask they will be different prices.

 

I think Gain are a 'bookie' type broker? (not sure to be honest) They can further manipulate the prices quoted as they are the counter party to your bet.

 

One thing for sure is FX is a bit of minefield :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest baywolf

Have you looked in to the CME FX futures products instead?

 

FX Products Homepage

 

Since this is done via ECN style exchange, there will be more transparency (I.e., book level + trades). I believe since this is done via CME, it is centralized so you don't need to aggregate multiple FX feeds in search for liquidity or best bid/offer.

 

Not sure about the futures data feed quality from TradeStation though. I think they use RJ O'Brien. I'd stay away from GAIN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you looked in to the CME FX futures products instead?

 

FX Products Homepage

 

Since this is done via ECN style exchange, there will be more transparency (I.e., book level + trades). I believe since this is done via CME, it is centralized so you don't need to aggregate multiple FX feeds in search for liquidity or best bid/offer.

 

Not sure about the futures data feed quality from TradeStation though. I think they use RJ O'Brien. I'd stay away from GAIN.

 

baywolf,

Have you looked at the volume on those futures products? It's abysmal.

Tasuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use eSignals FX on demand product. It works the same as full blown eSignal but has a limited broker choice, this doesn't worry me as I use it to get around my brokers unstable charting platform & restrictions in how it displays indicators. I execute via my brokers platform still. It's much cheaper than the full version FX feed unless you need to look at more than one source of FX data at a time.

 

The issue with the broad/raw FX feed that eSig delivers is that it has too many outliers and doesn't resemble most brokers actual high/lows. Good for sturdy backtesting though.

 

I've been trading way too long, I automatically capitalise the S in eSignal now :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

robertm,

The business of outliers is always a tricky one. I had a friend once who took the raw data from the exchanges and massaged it with some fancy software programming in order to parse out the big traders from the small traders. As part of the process, he had to clean up the raw data he purchased, and it said that it was very difficult to do because apparently there are ALOT of bad ticks, I mean really bad ticks, and it takes a massive amount of work to figure out what algorthims will clear away the bad stuff and leave only the correct trades. I'm surprised to hear that eSig's data has lots of outliers. Is this true for all their data, or only the "broad/raw FX feed"? Don't they have a polished up version of the data that they also sell?

Tasuki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robertm,

The business of outliers is always a tricky one. I had a friend once who took the raw data from the exchanges and massaged it with some fancy software programming in order to parse out the big traders from the small traders. As part of the process, he had to clean up the raw data he purchased, and it said that it was very difficult to do because apparently there are ALOT of bad ticks, I mean really bad ticks, and it takes a massive amount of work to figure out what algorthims will clear away the bad stuff and leave only the correct trades. I'm surprised to hear that eSig's data has lots of outliers. Is this true for all their data, or only the "broad/raw FX feed"? Don't they have a polished up version of the data that they also sell?

Tasuki

 

eSig offer contributor (broker) feeds, or you can opt for the A0 spot feed. I can't find a good link on it anywhere but the contributors that make up the A0 spot feed tend to give higher highs & lows (long wicks) making the data difficult to work with on shorter time frames. These prices don't reflect the prices your broker will give you, thus you use your brokers contributing feed to fine tune/trade a system as that's what will effect your entry, stops, targets etc.

 

The advantage of eSig is your charts will look the same, your indicators will look the same, only the data source has changed if you change brokers for some reason.

 

I don't care what my broker did to the data before it came to me, all I need is consistency between charting and execution :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
baywolf,

Have you looked at the volume on those futures products? It's abysmal.

Tasuki

 

6e/6b/6j, etc all are very liquid and actively traded.

 

I switched over to futures from spot a couple months ago and will never go back. The additional order types you can use, a 1 tick spread all the time, and the fact that I don't have to pay the spread twice unlike with fixed spread spot fx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.