Support Board
Date/Time: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 21:55:40 +0000
Incomplete exit for CTS server-side OCO
View Count: 1163
| [2017-09-16 19:24:55] |
| User35525 - Posts: 182 |
|
Hi SC, I am hoping you can help me troubleshoot. Please find attached my full trade activity log for 09-15. An NQ server-side OCO (2 lot market entry) position was entered at 9:15:59, and the entire position should have been closed at 9:40 but only half the position exited (split order I think), apparently due to CTS risk management: CTS order update (Rejected). Info: MaxAccountPosition of [5] exceeded by the account, NewMax: [6] Then later in the day, whenever I would disconnect-reconnect the CTS data feed, I'd see that same error in SC, even though I was completely flat.I double-checked that "All OCO Groups" was chosen for attached stops, on the trade window Target pane (was ok). I double-checked that "Hold Market Order Until Pending Cancel Orders Are Confirmed" was selected within Global Settings-->General Trade Settings (was ok). The SC documentation for that says: "Keep in mind, that if there is no confirmation from the external Trading service that the orders which have been canceled have actually been canceled, the Market order will never be sent. So there is some risk with using this option." Global Trade Settings Windows: Hold Market Order Until Pending Cancel Orders Are Confirmed (Global Settings >> General Trade Settings >> General) 3 questions: 1) Per the documented warning, are server-side OCO market entries really "risky" at CTS? Please find attached my trade activity log. 2) Is the following logic correct? With a 2-lot NQ position and 2-lot YM position (both market entries and server-side OCO at CTS), I might have trouble exiting, as the parent exit (which can happen before the attached orders) may put me over my 5-lot maximum? 3) As a solution, I could simply trade 3 total lots for now (like 1 CL and 2 NQ... or 1 CL and 2 YM), but my broker account is for a 5-lot max size, so I'd like to trade larger than 3 total size. Is there a full-proof way to handle that? For instance, if I use server-side bracket orders (limit entries at CTS), that should side-step the market order issue completely, as they're held at CME instead of the CTS brokerage, correct? And the CME will ensure the OCO bracket gets completely closed? If true, then can I increase position size to 5 total? (like 1 CL, 2 NQ, and 2 YM) I know I may also disable server-side OCO (and then everything is managed by SC), but I don't want to take-on that risk, and need server-side OCO. Thanks for helping - will thank you now and not follow-up unless I'm still unclear. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-09-16 21:56:23
|
Private File Private File |
| [2017-09-16 20:28:51] |
| |
|
This support request is not within the scope of our support. And also to whatever extent we could help, would be chargeable at 55 USD per hour. You need to understand our perspective on this. You have so many questions here all with a lot of complexity which involve various issues with external services and account configurations none of which we have any control over. There is also a fair amount of complexity to what you are doing and that has to be gradually understood by us. We just simply have no interest in getting involved in this. This is a detriment to everyone because it takes away time from our development to the benefit of the user base. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-09-16 20:33:52
|
| [2017-09-16 21:04:52] |
| User35525 - Posts: 182 |
|
My three questions were so simple you could answer them "YES", "YES", "YES" if you wanted. If you won't help, I'm begging other more knowledgable traders on this forum to please answer yes/no to my simple questions. I am not asking for any development, but I'd be more than happy to pay $55/hour some help if necessary. SC has always been much more friendly to me in the past, when I've had ACSIL questions. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-09-16 21:05:01
|
| [2017-09-16 21:05:38] |
| |
|
Refer to this section here about our support policies: Support Board Posting Information: General Information You should also use the new low-cost connection model which uses Sierra Chart managed OCO and bracket orders which is identical to how Sierra Chart manages them on the client side when not using server-side orders with a trading service. Refer to: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?page=doc/CTS_T4.php#SetupInstructionsForAdvancedLowCostConnectionModel Whether this will help or not, we do not know but certainly it should be at least some help we would think if you are having trouble with CTS managed OCO and bracket orders. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-09-16 21:07:31
|
| [2017-09-16 21:06:47] |
| |
|
Post #4 is not in response to post #3. We will respond to post #3 now. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing |
| [2017-09-16 21:13:00] |
| |
|
3 questions:
1) Per the documented warning, are server-side OCO market entries really "risky" at CTS? Please find attached my trade activity log. 2) Is the following logic correct? With a 2-lot NQ position and 2-lot YM position (both market entries and server-side OCO at CTS), I might have trouble exiting, as the parent exit (which can happen before the attached orders) may put me over my 5-lot maximum? 3) As a solution, I could simply trade 3 total lots for now (like 1 CL and 2 NQ... or 1 CL and 2 YM), but my broker account is for a 5-lot max size, so I'd like to trade larger than 3 total size. Is there a full-proof way to handle that? For instance, if I use server-side bracket orders (limit entries at CTS), that should side-step the market order issue completely, as they're held at CME instead of the CTS brokerage, correct? And the CME will ensure the OCO bracket gets completely closed? If true, then can I increase position size to 5 total? (like 1 CL, 2 NQ, and 2 YM) I know I may also disable server-side OCO (and then everything is managed by SC), but I don't want to take-on that risk, and need server-side OCO. Answers: 1. Risky in what way? What would the Trade Activity Log tell us in this particular case? How is this a simple question if it involves Trade Activity Log Analysis? Usually days go by before we even dare to look at a log. It is painfully difficult because we do not even know generally what to look for, and what they were intending. Generally it is best for a user to refer to our Trade Activity Log documentation and perform their own analysis. Also our position on this is well-established long-standing policy which is explained here: Trade Activity Log Analysis: Support Assisted Trade Activity Log Analysis 2. This is a question for CTS. We do not know the answer to it. 3. We also do not know the answer to this. Also in no case is OCO functionality ever handled at the exchange. This is either handled by Sierra Chart or the external trading service. And we do not see how anyone else looking at this thread can help you either other than CTS. And the way that CTS would help you is they would look at a particular order and tell you why it was rejected. They would not provide any kind of comprehensive analysis based upon overall what you are doing. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-09-16 21:28:18
|
| [2017-09-16 21:42:55] |
| User35525 - Posts: 182 |
|
Thank you for the follow-up answers. I'd love to use the "Advanced and lower cost connection model" but I'm using TopstepTrader. I'd love if TopstepTrader SC traders could clear through this lower cost model. I am using CTS at TopstepTrader on the advice of SC engineers, after reading many forum posts, because it's higher-quality than Rithmic (I know CTS has its own problems after re-reading the documentation you just sent). #1: When I said "risky", I was referring to the word "risk" in SC documentation: ..."So there is some risk with using this option." Global Trade Settings Windows: Hold Market Order Until Pending Cancel Orders Are Confirmed (Global Settings >> General Trade Settings >> General) I was asking for a "yes" or "no" if the CTS trading service does not give external confirmations that cancelled orders are actually cancelled (SC engineers should know since they made an advanced and lower cost alternative). #2: Other traders on this board have had their positions limited by CTS risk management (MaxAccountPosition) and an update to the documentation page here might help: Basic Trading and the Trade Window: Rejected Market Order When Using Flatten or Reverse Because of Position Limit Exceeded The documentation clearly lists a problem when NOT using a server-side OCO group, however I am using a server-side OCO group and have trouble, so I'm blaming the CTS external service. #3: I was asking for a solution. Thank you for the advanced and lower cost alternative. Until I can use that, I guess/hope/think my only other option at TopstepTrader is to let SC manage the OCO (no longer be server-side) OR to possibly use server-side OCO bracket orders (auto-OCO's in CTS terminology), which *I believe* (not 100% positive) get routed (by CTS) directly to the CME (which then handles them fully). I guess that's a questions CTS or TopstepTrader can answer for me. No need to further reply to me if you are too busy. I thank you for the help you already gave. I'm positive SC is the best trading software. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-09-16 21:50:41
|
| [2017-09-16 23:15:13] |
| |
|
1. No this is not risky with CTS. CTS is reliable with providing an execution report indicating an order has been canceled. 2. OK CTS can best answer this. We really do not know. 3. OR to possibly use server-side OCO bracket orders (auto-OCO's in CTS terminology), which *I believe* (not 100% positive) get routed (by CTS) directly to the CME (which then handles them fully). I guess that's a questions CTS or TopstepTrader can answer for me. No, this is not the case. These types of orders would be managed by CTS or by Sierra Chart if they are managed on the client side.---- Also we gradually have been working towards a full backend solution for order routing ( already exists), risk management, subaccount tracking and maintenance inside of a master/omnibus account, and full backend reporting/statements capabilities for the user, trading evaluator and broker ( almost ready). So therefore, we will be able to provide Top Step Trader a full solution which does not require either Rithmic or CTS. We would expect this would be ready sometime in the second quarter of next year. It is not something we are putting a lot of time into. Just something we are gradually working towards from time to time. For the time being it would be just meant for simulation purposes until it proves itself for Live trading. Although the order routing is already supported for Live trading. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-09-16 23:17:57
|
| [2017-09-17 00:14:19] |
| User35525 - Posts: 182 |
|
Thank you for these further clarifications. I want to be your first customer for that live trading service. :-) I am looking forward to an even better experience at TopstepTrader, with a 100% full SC backend solution; I already enjoy your real-time and historical exchange data feed, which has better uptime than CTS or Rithmic, not to mention the best performance and best historical bid/ask volume. The reason MacOS is better than Windows is Apple controls the hardware and the software, and you're on the right track by simplifying the stack. Thank you for everything you do. |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: