Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
I use and love NT for all its great flexibilities. But I must disagree that frequent issues with freezing is because of badly coded indicators alone. This freezing issue quite often happens during the Sundays, Monday market open, and contract rollover for certain instruments such as CL. It is very frustrating.
My solution to freezing issue has been to close and start NT with a blank Workspace (set as Default1). Then I start the day with the blank workspace, connect to ZenFire, and download a couple of days of tick data for the instruments that I trade to fill the gaps. Then I open my other trading and analysis workspaces. This method seems to work for me and avoids the issue, but should not be necessary.
If there are many complaints about freezing issues, then perhaps there is something to look into.
Enough said. I have not heard of ONE Sierra user who has used it for any period of time and switched to NT. Yet, most all SC users have used NT extensively at some point, found it to be lacking in most every respect, and switched, based on an actual comparison between the two. NT users are usually so by default, because it's the only thing they've tried, because it's totally free for life if you don't trade with it. SC users are usually so because they have made a real comparison, and made a logical choice.
I have listed, and can list again if you like, the many ways that SC is superior, both on a performance basis and on a feature basis. However, why don't we approach it from a different perspective. Instead of listing the ways that NT is simply as good as SC in comparison, how about listing one or two ways that NT is actually better than SC? In other words, what would a SC users be able to say, "man, I wish SC had this feature that NT has..." I'm sure there are some, I just can't think of any.
Example?
So on a public forum where 90% are sim trading, you think it's a plus that the platform of choice for sim-only traders, NT, is something to brag about? Nothing wrong with sim trading, at all. But NT is well-established because it's FREE, and thus many who aren't willing to spend a penny on their platform and who are on a never-ending indicator grail quest are drawn to it and all the freebie code available. So, it is not surprising that it also attracts many programmers (and some very good ones, like Fat Tails, gomi, etc.). But in the end, a popularity contest where one is free for life and another is not, is not exactly comparing apples to apples.
I should make one thing very clear: I have no gripe with NT users (I used to be one after all), and think it's great if an NT users loves his or her software, if it does the job. My issue is not with users who have chosen their software and are happy with it. However, I am free to speak my opinion and in my belief, people who use NT without exploring other options are making a regrettable decision, and so I am only encouraging people to explore their options. There are some great pieces of trading software out there that people simply never try, and get frustrated because they just do not know their options, and I think that is a shame.
So, in a program designed to display accurate charts first and foremost, and then draw on those charts using lines and shapes, they do not make it a priority over a multi-year span of time to fix a major problem like this, which they admit is a problem, which users have requested numerous times to fix.
What this means, if the past is any indicator, is: "I will be happy to hold out the carrot within reach such that you are convinced the feature or bug fix might get implemented; however, we have no real intention of adding anything new over the next couple of years to our program, but please keep using it for free so that we can make money from our trading partners!"
----------
Take another example. 10 levels of depth in the DOM. Pretty standard for DOMs. In NT it's 5, and always has been.
Their support is polite, and sometimes helpful, but often ineffective. It's not their fault; they answer to the people in charge. If NT were a rock solid program that never crashed, was uber-efficient and lean and mean, then I can understand never implementing anything new, and only releasing a major release every 3 years with only incremental bug fixes every quarter. But it's none of those things.
NT will retain many users because of its subscription-free license offer, and because it's free to hook new traders before they discover what else is out there, and it will retain those who have enough time/money/ego invested in it who will never switch. But many people seem to be starting to realize that it's not all it's cracked up to be. And here's the kicker: I would switch back to NT if it got better. I have no interest invested in SC, except my monthly fee. The moment that NT becomes better than SC, I will use my lifetime license and become a regular user again. All I want is the best software; at the moment SC is light-years ahead of NT, but that could conceivably change, albeit with maybe a change in philosophies and ownership.
After I read the above, I felt a little bad, like maybe I'm "NT-bashing," but then I thought back and realized that they don't care enough about their users to fix simple things, so why should I think twice before laying out the paper trail showing how they operate?
Hi Steve,
NinjaTrader is a superior trading platform. The platform will not make your trading decisions for you - other than that, it does just about everything else. You asked for input and here's mine: don't waste your time with Sierra. Good luck.
I never used ninja so I can't speak about it but I do use SC (though not for execution) and am happy with it. I used TT for over 9 years as a serious tick chasing scalper so accuracy was extremely important and it didnt disappoint, not sure where some people are coming from saying it isnt. that being said, I used to pay $1200 a month for X trader pro and my current front end with my broker is free and 100% accurate and as functional as needed so I think TT's day is over for manual point and clickers and you are right to seek an alternative. Seems you have people on both sides of the argument here so my suggestion is to arrange a free trial for both and see what you like better!
Regarding the cost, I heard you have to pay some extra fees on per trade basis with NT. Also, SC allows you to trade through multiple brokers. So the saving is less for NT if you have multiple brokers. (BTW, SC has no problem to trade through 4-5 brokers at the same time since it uses separate instance for each broker. I am not even sure NT is technically able to do that, anyone ever tried?)
It is great to be able to express one's opinion based on personal experience only. But, with all due respect, to state that it is a shame other users not knowing their options and are making regrettable decisions is a bit presumptuous.
One's opinion based on one's personal experience carries more weight than based on one's perception of other people experiences. Lots of real traders here use NT for reasons unknown to public and they seem to be happy and making money too.
