NexusFi: Find Your Edge


Home Menu

 





3 phase order entry


Discussion in Sierra Chart

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one i960 with 3 posts (0 thanks)
    2. looks_two Big Mike with 1 posts (0 thanks)
    3. looks_3 Sawtooth with 1 posts (0 thanks)
    4. looks_4 josh with 1 posts (1 thanks)
    1. trending_up 1,857 views
    2. thumb_up 2 thanks given
    3. group 7 followers
    1. forum 9 posts
    2. attach_file 0 attachments




 
Search this Thread

3 phase order entry

  #1 (permalink)
 i960 
San Francisco, CA
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: SC, eSignal
Broker: IB
Trading: Spreads
Posts: 46 since Jan 2015
Thanks Given: 44
Thanks Received: 43

Recent idea I submitted on the SC forums. Voice your voice there if you agree/desire it so that it doesn't get crushed with a "this is too hard" excuse from engineering.

It's under the thread titled "Staging and modifying bracket order levels before transmitting to server?" (unfortunately I cannot post a direct link to it due to a low post count).

The gist of it is that chart trading could provide an alternate order entry whereby rather than 1-click brackets, it's a 3-click entry->stop->target system where the entry is made, a stop line shows up in already draggable mode - user clicks based on action where to secure it, target shows up in already draggable mode - user clicks based on action where to secure it, order sent.

Some people might thing "yeah but that's slower than it is now," and I'd say, how many people actually do not modify their stop/target after submitting the bracket? It's probably done *every* single time because a generic 1:3 or similar ratio doesn't even mean anything when one is trading based off of price action, support resistance, buy/sell zones, etc.

It would also help Eurex traders (cancellation fees), and OEC traders (who must cancel server side OCO brackets if they want to adjust anything [alternative of client side is a bad alternative]).

People use the chart trading because they're able to surgically and quickly see the areas they want to short/long from and place stops based on risk and where the trade is obviously invalidated and targets based on likely target points. This just streamlines the process.

Started this thread Reply With Quote

Can you help answer these questions
from other members on NexusFi?
NT7 Indicator Script Troubleshooting - Camarilla Pivots
NinjaTrader
Better Renko Gaps
The Elite Circle
NexusFi Journal Challenge - May 2024
Feedback and Announcements
Pivot Indicator like the old SwingTemp by Big Mike
NinjaTrader
REcommedations for programming help
Sierra Chart
 
Best Threads (Most Thanked)
in the last 7 days on NexusFi
Spoo-nalysis ES e-mini futures S&P 500
48 thanks
Just another trading journal: PA, Wyckoff & Trends
34 thanks
Bigger Wins or Fewer Losses?
24 thanks
Tao te Trade: way of the WLD
24 thanks
GFIs1 1 DAX trade per day journal
22 thanks
  #2 (permalink)
 
Big Mike's Avatar
 Big Mike 
Manta, Ecuador
Site Administrator
Developer
Swing Trader
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: Custom solution
Broker: IBKR
Trading: Stocks & Futures
Frequency: Every few days
Duration: Weeks
Posts: 50,446 since Jun 2009
Thanks Given: 33,217
Thanks Received: 101,610

No thanks, I would rather them spend engineering resources elsewhere personally.

Mike

We're here to help: just ask the community or contact our Help Desk

Quick Links: Change your Username or Register as a Vendor
Searching for trading reviews? Review this list
Lifetime Elite Membership: Sign-up for only $149 USD
Exclusive money saving offers from our Site Sponsors: Browse Offers
Report problems with the site: Using the NexusFi changelog thread
Follow me on Twitter Visit my NexusFi Trade Journal Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)
 i960 
San Francisco, CA
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: SC, eSignal
Broker: IB
Trading: Spreads
Posts: 46 since Jan 2015
Thanks Given: 44
Thanks Received: 43


I'm not saying they should drop everything and begin work on this by any means - I was simply throwing it out there as a potential idea for further down the line. I'm also not being paid to manage their workflow - therefore I'm not going to alter my ideas based on that. At the same time I don't expect them to just stop what they're presently working on for new features - that's a losing battle. However, I'd rather not see answers like "sorry, no" to literally everything they don't have the present time for - as that's a copout answer.

The Eurex and OEC issues may not affect you directly, but I'd imagine they do for others. Many systems work around things like order cancellation fees by playing a bunch of client side games on when orders should be modified. In the OEC/Sierra case where people cannot even modify server side OCO brackets, it's pretty obvious that's an OEC issue that should be fixed. Using client side orders as the workaround has it's own issues, albeit not the end of the world (but it could be for those unlucky times when a pending order is out there and your connection goes away).

For the general trading case, most people do the exact same amount of work even with a typical 1-click entry setup. Enter, now adjust stops/targets. I personally know I'm not sitting there putting in tick offsets in a trading window while the opportunity is passing me by.

Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)
 Jolew 
San Jose, CA
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: Sierra Chart
Broker: IB
Trading: Futures
Posts: 113 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 54
Thanks Received: 97

I agree with Mike. I noticed that you have a couple of posts like this about Sierra. Personally, I am pretty excited about the current direction of their development and impressed with what they have accomplished over the last couple of years.

I'm sure they will have more time for the kinds of things you are looking for in the not too distant future. For now, though, I am eagerly awaiting for them to port to new operating systems. Seems like a huge engineering task to me and maybe other things have to temporarily take a back seat.

Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)
 Sawtooth 
Prescott AZ USA
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: SierraChart
Broker: Stage5, FCM:Dorman, Data:Denali, Routing:Teton
Trading: YM ES NQ
Posts: 474 since Nov 2009
Thanks Given: 219
Thanks Received: 603

Here's why SC is disinclined to pursue suggested nice-to-have enhancements, and have asked users to refrain from them:
Notice: Suggestions - Support Board - Sierra Chart

Let's let them get caught up.

Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)
 
cory's Avatar
 cory 
virginia
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: ninja
Trading: NQ
Posts: 6,098 since Jun 2009
Thanks Given: 877
Thanks Received: 8,090

SC tough love

Quoting 
Sometimes someone posts a feature request and hopes for an answer and hope that is going to be done right away. There is 0% possibility of this.


Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)
 
josh's Avatar
 josh 
Georgia, US
Legendary Market Wizard
 
Experience: None
Platform: SC
Broker: Denali+Rithmic
Trading: ES, NQ, YM
Posts: 6,239 since Jan 2011
Thanks Given: 6,779
Thanks Received: 18,239


cory View Post
SC tough love

Yes, but their platform has made leaps and bounds, and is still near rock-solid stable, and still lean and fast, over the last few years, while some competitors have stayed on the same version for years at a time, not improving, not upgrading, not listening to customers, not fixing bugs. SC's model is light years ahead of the rest. If they won't do the development, they tell you, and you accept it; but much of the time they will do the development, and they fix bugs super fast..

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #8 (permalink)
Jaymes Porter
Salt Lake City, Utah
 
Posts: 11 since Mar 2015
Thanks Given: 2
Thanks Received: 0

I think there's a large amount of areas where they could better allocate engineering resources, but that's just me.

Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)
 
mattz's Avatar
 mattz   is a Vendor
 
Posts: 2,493 since Sep 2010
Thanks Given: 2,441
Thanks Received: 3,791


josh View Post
Yes, but their platform has made leaps and bounds, and is still near rock-solid stable, and still lean and fast, over the last few years, while some competitors have stayed on the same version for years at a time, not improving, not upgrading, not listening to customers, not fixing bugs. SC's model is light years ahead of the rest. If they won't do the development, they tell you, and you accept it; but much of the time they will do the development, and they fix bugs super fast..

You have always been a fan of SC from day one, and not a follower of the popular like a herd.
SC, a company that grew organically without paying for ads, rather spends all it's efforts on making a better product.
They should have more users, because people should compensate ONLY those who have customer's best interest at heart.
I should have listened Josh, people with a belief systems like yours win, in life and in business.

Proud of you buddy for always sticking to the same belief system from day one!

Matt

Trading futures and options involves substantial risk of loss and is not suitable for all investors. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. You may lose more than your initial investment. All posts are opinions and do not claim to be facts. Please conduct your own due diligence. Use only Risk capital when trading Futures.
1 800 771 6748 local 561 367 8686 email [email protected]
Follow me on Twitter Visit my NexusFi Trade Journal Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #10 (permalink)
 i960 
San Francisco, CA
 
Experience: Advanced
Platform: SC, eSignal
Broker: IB
Trading: Spreads
Posts: 46 since Jan 2015
Thanks Given: 44
Thanks Received: 43



Jolew View Post
I agree with Mike. I noticed that you have a couple of posts like this about Sierra. Personally, I am pretty excited about the current direction of their development and impressed with what they have accomplished over the last couple of years.

I'm sure they will have more time for the kinds of things you are looking for in the not too distant future. For now, though, I am eagerly awaiting for them to port to new operating systems. Seems like a huge engineering task to me and maybe other things have to temporarily take a back seat.

Go check out my posts on the SC support board and will you see that all I do over there is try and help make the product better and help others where I can, with probably the emphasis more on buggy/questionable behavior rather than pushing feature requests. I've literally pointed out programming logic errors in their own code (of which they claimed 110% confidence in) and they still argue with it even though users are being directly affected by it. There is ego there and it's annoying to have to deal with it as a paying customer.

There's setting healthy limitations and then there's just claiming "no" on anything they don't immediately see as beneficial to them personally. Even simple stuff... "Can we get rays to have a tool config for limited extension so they don't litter the charts for eternity? Answer: No." "When we cut lines, can we preserve their anchors so they actually work right afterward? Answer: No." Don't get me wrong, I definitely love SC and use it for nearly everything. I appreciate their time limitations. I simply don't appreciate the fact the way they come across. It's not tough love, it's "we know better than you" and when people put some real time and effort into trying to make something they believe in better and are basically told to F off (obviously not in those words) it'll just stop good supporting users from offering support/suggestions of any kind.

Started this thread Reply With Quote




Last Updated on April 3, 2015


© 2024 NexusFi™, s.a., All Rights Reserved.
Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama City, Panama, Ph: +507 833-9432 (Panama and Intl), +1 888-312-3001 (USA and Canada)
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.
About Us - Contact Us - Site Rules, Acceptable Use, and Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy - Downloads - Top
no new posts