I think a lot probably depends on how well the charting platform developers understood the IB Application Program Interface (API) and the effort they made to get the data feed to work properly. This could explain some of the IB good/ IB bad comments. I've looked back through this thread but cannot really figure out what software is being used. The OP asked about Multicharts. But some mention was made of Ninja and there are other mentions of feeds without charting packages. So a little more info about the package used might help sort things out.
Last edited by JackR; January 14th, 2012 at 12:35 AM.
Reason: revised for clarity
The following user says Thank You to JackR for this post:
Yes I think you are right, this probably explains the different experiences. There are very many details about the data and API. When I moved to MC it was on the basis that it could do many of the things TS does but better/faster. I wanted a plattform that could automate trading within one package but not have to trade via TS. I have found MC to be very much faster in real time trading (I have never perceived any charting lag) as well as backtesting, and also more stable.
I had the impression that MC was conceived to some or a great extent with IB as an important data supplier and therefore the support for IB is excellent. So, with reference to MC, the idea that IB realtime data does not match history or that it can't do volume or range bar charts is absurd, I would have spotted that on day one!
The following 2 users say Thank You to SPTrading for this post: