Sierra vs. Ninja : why I chose ..... - Sierra Chart | futures io social day trading
futures io futures trading


Sierra vs. Ninja : why I chose .....
Updated: Views / Replies:39,093 / 160
Created: by josh Attachments:11

Welcome to futures io.

(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)

futures io is the largest futures trading community on the planet, with over 90,000 members. At futures io, our goal has always been and always will be to create a friendly, positive, forward-thinking community where members can openly share and discuss everything the world of trading has to offer. The community is one of the friendliest you will find on any subject, with members going out of their way to help others. Some of the primary differences between futures io and other trading sites revolve around the standards of our community. Those standards include a code of conduct for our members, as well as extremely high standards that govern which partners we do business with, and which products or services we recommend to our members.

At futures io, our focus is on quality education. No hype, gimmicks, or secret sauce. The truth is: trading is hard. To succeed, you need to surround yourself with the right support system, educational content, and trading mentors Ė all of which you can find on futures io, utilizing our social trading environment.

With futures io, you can find honest trading reviews on brokers, trading rooms, indicator packages, trading strategies, and much more. Our trading review process is highly moderated to ensure that only genuine users are allowed, so you donít need to worry about fake reviews.

We are fundamentally different than most other trading sites:
  • We are here to help. Just let us know what you need.
  • We work extremely hard to keep things positive in our community.
  • We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts.
  • We firmly believe in and encourage sharing. The holy grail is within you, we can help you find it.
  • We expect our members to participate and become a part of the community. Help yourself by helping others.

You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community.  It's free and simple.

-- Big Mike, Site Administrator

Reply
 11  
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
 

Sierra vs. Ninja : why I chose .....

  #21 (permalink)
in a meditative state...
Portugal
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: Multicharts, Jigsaw
Broker/Data: Stage5, OEC
Favorite Futures: Treasuries
 
arnie's Avatar
 
Posts: 801 since May 2010
Thanks: 709 given, 976 received


trendisyourfriend View Post
Although i do not use SC i have noticed some differences with my charts and Big Mike's charts. His MP charts differ from mines not by much but they do differ at times by 2-3 ticks on the ES.

That is indeed a problem when the same tool act differently on different platforms. This means that each platform is doing their own calculation, their own view of the tool.
For example, one that messes traders is the cumulative tick volume. SC have a complete different calculation when compared with IRT. This is very problematic. Cumulative bid/ask volume is identical but the tick version isn't? I remember ask SC staff about this and their answer couldn't have be more explicit - our calculations are the correct one, this is the way we feel the calculations should be done.

Now my questions is, which is the correct one? Apparently Gomi version for Ninja is identical to IRT. Can we say IRT and Gomi are wrong and SC is correct?

How can we trust a tool in which there's no consensus in it's calculations?

If I become half a percent smarter each year, I'll be a genius by the time I die
Reply With Quote
 
  #22 (permalink)
in a meditative state...
Portugal
 
Futures Experience: Advanced
Platform: Multicharts, Jigsaw
Broker/Data: Stage5, OEC
Favorite Futures: Treasuries
 
arnie's Avatar
 
Posts: 801 since May 2010
Thanks: 709 given, 976 received


cusp View Post
You could if you knew how it should be calculated.

A bit of hard work and a little research might prove it one way or another. Show them the truth and they'll change the platform overnight, but only if it is the demonstrable truth.

Which truth, mine or theirs?

I don't use delta based on ticks, only based on volume, so it really don't bother me the differences between platforms, but I know a couple of traders that do use both and they continue to stick with IRT and MD because, according to them, they are the ones that are calculating it correctly.

So here's an example since I still have SC available for the next 2 weeks.

Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).


Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).



EDIT: Why bother cusp?

I thought we were having here a healthy discussion about SC and it's pros and cons.
We might help people decide when they start to search for a new chart platform.

If I become half a percent smarter each year, I'll be a genius by the time I die

Last edited by arnie; August 21st, 2012 at 09:00 AM. Reason: add comment
Reply With Quote
 
  #23 (permalink)
Trading Apprentice
Denver, Colorado, USA
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Ninjatrader
Broker/Data: Kinetick
Favorite Futures: Forex
 
Posts: 36 since Aug 2011
Thanks: 6 given, 17 received



josh View Post
Well, when I tried out Sierra yesterday, I was blown away by how far it has come. I mean, with essentially the same setup in NT which takes about 200MB of resident memory, Sierra was humming along at 20MB!! Data loads pretty fast, and while there is a learning curve, in a matter of hours I had my charts almost duplicated, having learned the basics of the Sierra programming interface and already ported over two indicators. I just loved how this thing was working. Run multiple copies for different data providers, do anything you like. This is one flexible program, and honestly I love everything about it... except for....

.... the moment of heartbreak. I have the two running side by side, and for a direct comparison I connect both to IQFeed. Here is a comparison of the tape:

T&S comparison: 2012-08-20_1022 - joshtrader's library

You will be able to notice that Sierra (on the right) is delayed. It's only maybe 100-250ms. It doesn't sound like a lot, but even before I made the comparison to NT, my heart was a bit heavy as I watched the tape in Sierra. It looked as if it just did not handle quick bursts very well. The bottom line is that it just is not as quick. To be sure, I disconnected both, connected Sierra first, and THEN connected NT (thinking maybe order of connection might be prioritized), but same deal--NT simply is faster.

What you describe here may partially be due to Space-time trade-off.

Space?time tradeoff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Basically, many tasks have an inverse relationship between CPU time and memory usage, so as CPU usage decreases, memory usage increases, and vice verci. Depending on the needs for the software either can be exploited, so its an engineering decision. There is also the capability to store things on the hard drive rather than system memory, but this typically has slower performance.

With memory being so cheap these days I would usually choose faster CPU performance, but its a personal preference really and depends on the application. Usually you won't run into neither cpu nor memory issues on a mid-range PC purchased today but for some applications you still test the limitations of the hardware. I was a research assistant for awhile and we would routinely use up all our 12 GB of memory on our local PC's running image processing algorithms for example so we had to either use a high-performance computing cluster (and wait for everyone and their dog to finish their previously queued jobs) or "engineer" our algorithm to fit within the memory constraints.

Anyway, just my two cents.


Last edited by Antisyzygy; August 21st, 2012 at 10:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Antisyzygy for this post:
 
  #24 (permalink)
Elite Member
Tomsk, Russia
 
Futures Experience: Beginner
Platform: custom
Favorite Futures: gold
 
slickiam's Avatar
 
Posts: 253 since Dec 2010
Thanks: 131 given, 427 received


trendisyourfriend View Post
Although i do not use SC i have noticed some differences with my charts and Big Mike's charts. His MP charts differ from mines not by much but they do differ at times by 2-3 ticks on the ES.

Hello.

Maybe this was the reason?


Quoting 
The method used by SC and IRT/MD are almost identical with the exception that IRT compares 2 price levels above POC to 2 price levels below POC whereas SC compares 1 price level above and below the POC. The IRT site states that method A is similar to that used by esignal, which has been around for some time and I suspect lot of people use this method. Investor/RT - Answers* (LinnSoft.com) IRT also has Method B which is based on the CQG method.

gd lck

Scientia Libertas Prosperitas
Reply With Quote
The following 5 users say Thank You to slickiam for this post:
 
  #25 (permalink)
Error-prone
Bundeburg
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Sierra Chart
Favorite Futures: Fx
 
Posts: 76 since Mar 2012
Thanks: 24 given, 42 received

Arnie,

The deletion and the "why bother" reflected the lack of content in my post. In other words, why fall into the

"Honey, sorry I can't come to bed yet." ....
"Why dear?" ....
"Someone is wrong on the internet!"

trap. In that case I thought doing some work was more productive.


However it's nice to see that @slickiam (nice name) had done the extra work. I'll quote the post he referenced:



joeroma @ Sierra Chart Support Board
This issue keeps coming up but to understand it I think you have to appreciate the history of MP and realize that MP is based on statistical theory. I addressed this issue last year and I will repeat it here.

The method used by SC and IRT/MD are almost identical with the exception that IRT compares 2 price levels above POC to 2 price levels below POC whereas SC compares 1 price level above and below the POC. The IRT site states that method A is similar to that used by esignal, which has been around for some time and I suspect lot of people use this method. Investor/RT - Answers* (LinnSoft.com) IRT also has Method B which is based on the CQG method.

A few years back I asked Don Jones of Cisco-Futures why he compares only 1 price level above and below the POC whereas Dalton's book (Don's son is one of the co-authors) said to compare 2 prices above and below the POC. He said that, when MP was introduced in the 80s for the bonds, there was a problem when they tried to apply it to the grains because of low volume at some price levels. Consequently, they decided to use 2 price levels. However, he stated that because there is plenty of volume with the es, ym, etc., the most appropriate way is to use only one price level above and below the POC.

There seems to be different methods floating around and people can choose whatever they want. Personally I'll stick to what Don taught me since he was involved with MP from early on with Pete Steidlmayer and it is more consistent with MP theory and my understanding of statistical theory. This is the method that SC uses.

However, I think that in the long run it probably will not make much of a difference which method you select since, as we all know, trading is not an exact science. When many of us select an area where we plan to enter a trade that area may encompass the VAH/VAL of different methods. Indeed, I have noticed that more often than not these different methods seem to produce values that differ only by a few ticks. The only exception seems to be on bigger range days when the differences tend to be significant. This is why I also look at vol-based VA and tend to place more weight on vol-based value areas.


Hope this helps.


On that basis I don't think the Sierra guys will change it


Personally I don't use market or volume profiles. I've looked at them but find multi-timeframe supply and demand zones give me a better trading tool. I do have a fair bit of customization and some automation and some trading direct from Sierra. Like others I also use more than one copy. For me Sierra Chart has been a very satisfactory product.

Reply With Quote
The following 4 users say Thank You to cusp for this post:
 
  #26 (permalink)
Elite Member
La Jolla, CA
 
Futures Experience: Master
Platform: Sierra Chart, X_Trader Pro, OptionsCity
Broker/Data: Advantage, Trading Technologies, OptionsCity, IQ Feed
Favorite Futures: CL, NG
 
Private Banker's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,040 since Jul 2010
Thanks: 1,713 given, 3,759 received


Silvester17 View Post
this is supposed to be a market profile (not volume profile) ,es, 7/27/2012, only rth, 3 min chart

That "indicator" was rounded to a 5 tick setting... This is why it is appearing to be higher than price. In reality, price was higher than the VAH. The referenced lines were simply well... reference points. MP isn't just about the Value and POC areas... There's nothing wrong with Sierra's indicators.

I find this rather comical...

Reply With Quote
 
  #27 (permalink)
Elite Member
La Jolla, CA
 
Futures Experience: Master
Platform: Sierra Chart, X_Trader Pro, OptionsCity
Broker/Data: Advantage, Trading Technologies, OptionsCity, IQ Feed
Favorite Futures: CL, NG
 
Private Banker's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,040 since Jul 2010
Thanks: 1,713 given, 3,759 received


josh View Post
As if by magic, or perhaps divine inspiration, I found a setting in Sierra under "General Settings" that allows the user to change the chart update interval. I changed this from 500ms to 1ms, and look at her go now!!!!

T&S, NT on left, Sierra on right:
2012-08-20_1130 - joshtrader's library

Sierra DOM:
2012-08-20_1133 - joshtrader's library

Chart:
2012-08-20_1156 - joshtrader's library

So it appears that Sierra is actually faster than NT, not the other way around as I originally thought. NT also has an update interval but the minimum is 100ms, FWIW.

Feeling quite the doofus right now, I ask myself: do I have the courage to try Sierra for real? The answer is YES! I will try it this week on sim, and see how it goes. Still lots of learning to do, but as it stands, Ninja has to show me something pretty spectacular (note that I do own a ninja lifetime license and wish I could have that option for sierra).

Sierra is an excellent platform and far superior than most available. I left NT quite a while back and could not be happier with Sierra. I was evaluating between Market Delta and Sierra and went with Sierra for a variety of reasons.

Reply With Quote
The following 4 users say Thank You to Private Banker for this post:
 
  #28 (permalink)
Elite Member
Georgia, US
 
Futures Experience: None
Platform: Various
Favorite Futures: Various
 
josh's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,897 since Jan 2011
Thanks: 5,143 given, 11,242 received


Private Banker View Post
Sierra is an excellent platform and far superior than most available. I left NT quite a while back and could not be happier with Sierra. I was evaluating between Market Delta and Sierra and went with Sierra for a variety of reasons.

PB, do you use the sierra DOM? Could you take a screen shot, and anyone else who uses it? I am experimenting and have this currently, but am looking to eliminate that big space on the bottom left and fill it with something more useful.

Attached Thumbnails
Sierra vs. Ninja : why I chose .....-sierradom.png  
Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to josh for this post:
 
  #29 (permalink)
Market Wizard
Columbus, OH
 
Futures Experience: None
Platform: NT 8, TOS
Favorite Futures: ES
 
Silvester17's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,332 since Aug 2009
Thanks: 4,579 given, 10,313 received


Private Banker View Post
That "indicator" was rounded to a 5 tick setting... This is why it is appearing to be higher than price. In reality, price was higher than the VAH. The referenced lines were simply well... reference points. MP isn't just about the Value and POC areas... There's nothing wrong with Sierra's indicators.

I find this rather comical...

well, like I said, I saw something strange and only wanted to know if anybody made some comparison with other platforms. I never said it's just about value or poc, nor did I say that sierra's indicators are wrong.

but thanks anyway. aes isch hoechschti isaebahn fuer mi.

Reply With Quote
The following user says Thank You to Silvester17 for this post:
 
  #30 (permalink)
Elite Member
Los Angeles, CA
 
Futures Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker/Data: Rithmic
Favorite Futures: GC
 
plethora's Avatar
 
Posts: 639 since Dec 2010
Thanks: 1,174 given, 422 received


Ninja Trader's Customer Service is spectacular, the moment you own or lease the license, even in the evening or on the weekend. I often had to wait days to hear back from SC.

ETA: NT needs to catch up in the Market Profile area, and maybe they will in the next release.

The fact that so many brilliant coders use NT and generously share their gifts means it's a party every day.


Last edited by plethora; August 22nd, 2012 at 02:49 AM.
Reply With Quote

Reply



futures io > > > > Sierra vs. Ninja : why I chose .....

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Upcoming Webinars and Events (4:30PM ET unless noted)

Jigsaw Trading: TBA

Elite only

FuturesTrader71: TBA

Elite only

NinjaTrader: TBA

Jan 18

RandBots: TBA

Jan 23

GFF Brokers & CME Group: Futures & Bitcoin

Elite only

Adam Grimes: TBA

Elite only

Ran Aroussi: TBA

Elite only
     

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ninja Indicator to Ninja Strategy emini_Holy_Grail NinjaTrader Programming 10 March 10th, 2013 12:23 AM
Sierra and its issues... arnie Sierra Chart 6 September 30th, 2012 07:39 AM
Sierra Charts Ninja Trader backup and restore to new computer Angler The Elite Circle 12 August 23rd, 2012 01:13 PM
Switching Fin.Alg TPO Market profile from Ninja 6.5 to ninja 7 MadManmos Trading Reviews and Vendors 19 August 23rd, 2011 09:15 AM
Any Sierra Programmers around? tomb06 Sierra Chart Programming 6 July 13th, 2011 10:38 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:38 AM.

Copyright © 2017 by futures io, s.a., Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama, +507 833-9432, info@futures.io
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice.
There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
no new posts
Page generated 2017-12-15 in 0.17 seconds with 20 queries on phoenix via your IP 54.234.255.29