Current location | Thread information | |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Last Activity 7/17/2018 6:22 PM 105 replies, 9983 viewings |
Printer friendly version |
^ Top | |||
SteveL![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 189 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Boulder, CO ![]() |
I've posted a question in the OmniTrader Forum, where I'd appreciate input from someone who has knowledge of how to use an IB Master/Advisor account with OT through TWS. http://www.omnitrader.com/currentclients/otforum/thread-view.asp?threadid=8861&posts=1#33539 Thanks. | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve2![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 750 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Annapolis, MD ![]() |
I believe there is currently an issue with the IB Gateway related to losing orders if TP submits an order while the IB Gateway is not connected to the IB servers. It doesn't happen all the time and seems to be related to the IB Gateway doing an internal restart when it has un-submitted orders queued. The greatest risk for this happening is if your TP is configured to submit orders on weekends. IB typically does maintenance on Saturdays and sometimes this maintenance leads to dropped connections with IB Gateway and IB Gateway internal restarts when the connection is restored. I've been running one TP/IB configuration for almost two years that is not configured to submit orders on weekends and have never encountered this problem. I started running a second TP/IB configuration where the TP is configured to submit orders on weekends (i.e., Friday orders are submitted on Saturdays at 8am) and have encountered this problem twice in two months. I'm currently "in negotiations" with the IB api group about whether or not this is a bug (which I'm sure it is). So far, they are unconvinced but their advice is to not submit orders during the weekend (although they said Sunday night would be ok since everything is always back up and running by then). So, it you are running TP with IB, I recommend that you NOT check the Weekend box under order submission. I'll post again if I get any more info from the IB api group. Steve | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve2![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 750 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Annapolis, MD ![]() |
Ran across an interesting (and undocumented as far as I know) IB restriction on MOO and MOC orders. IB will reject a MOO or MOC order if the order size is greater than 10% of the 20-day average daily volume for the stock where the average daily volume is calculated ONLY from the exchanges or ECNs that IB uses to trade the stock. This average volume number can be way less than the average daily volume for the stock across all the exchanges or ECNs where it trades. For example, I hit this restriction when I attempted to submit an order for 9K shares of a stock with 20-day average daily volume of 360K shares. This restriction is enforced across the aggregate number of shares of all MOO/MOC orders you submit so breaking a large order up does not avoid the problem. The error returned is "Order Size Out of Range". I believe this error can also be returned if you hit one of your "Precaution" limits that can be set in the IB Gateway or TWS so if you get this error, you need to first check those limits. If they have not been exceeded then you have probably been hit by this restriction. To avoid the problem, you can submit Market Orders before market open rather than MOO orders. I did extensive testing of slippage related to MOO vs Market orders submitted before market open and did not find any difference in slippage between the two. However, that testing was done with more liquid stocks and with smaller order sizes (< 2,500 shares). I am switching back to submitting market orders rather than MOO orders and I'll report back if I do notice any significant difference in slippage between the two order types. Of course, the other way to avoid this is to set the Max Trade Size as % of Avg Daily Volume account setting to a low number like 0.5% to 1% but that will cause trades to be filtered out which might not be the behavior you want. Steve | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark Holstius![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 744 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Sleepy Hollow, IL ![]() |
Hmmmm... Thanks for passing it on, Steve. That could be a problem with low volume ETFs. Do you know where to find the volume IB uses? Mark | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve2![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 750 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Annapolis, MD ![]() |
Yes, that is how I found it. IB says there is no way for a customer to find out the volume information. My suggestion would be to submit market orders but we may have lost the ability to configure TP to do this. Am checking with Barry now. Steve | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark Holstius![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 744 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Sleepy Hollow, IL ![]() |
Well Steve, I just had one of those this morning too on a thinly traded ETF (Europe: UPV). Glad you mentioned this as I wouldn't have recognized IB's cryptic "order size out of range" message. Have you heard from Barry about the ability to enter Market Orders before the open with IB? Thanks, Mark | ||
^ Top | |||
Barry Cohen![]() Icon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1844 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
Currently it submits as MOO during the times IB accepts MOO, otherwise it submits as Market. Getting market orders right before market open isn't curently possible, but I've made a request about it. Here are a couple possible work-arounds: - You could set the start time to 9:30:00AM EST in order to get market orders. This would allow market orders to submit & execute right at market open. - You could set the start time anywhere between 4:00:00PM EST & 7:59:00PM EST. This would allow you to submit market orders the day before they are executed. | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve2![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 750 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Annapolis, MD ![]() |
I've changed the start of my trading window to 09:30:01 EDT so my orders are submitted as market orders one second after market open. This gets around the problem. No slippage so far for the two trades that have been executed this way. One caution about setting the start of your trading window between 4pm and 7:59 pm if you are trading a margin account. IB does Reg-T margin checks near market close each trading day. They seem to have a window that starts 15 minutes prior to market close and extends for some (unknown) period of time after market close where 2X margin is enforced. Once that window closes then they are back to enforcing 4X through the end of the next trading day. This means you don't have to be concerned about execution order for closing/opening orders if you are near fully invested. If this is a concern for you, I would not submit the next day's orders until after 8 pm EDT. Steve | ||
^ Top | |||
SteveL![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 189 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Boulder, CO ![]() |
Barry, The latest IB TWS/Gateway build 956.2C is now supported by OT and VT. How about the TradeProcessor? Can it be used with the latest version IB TWS/Gateway v956.2C, or does it still require build 9443b? [Edited by SteveL on 5/7/2016 12:10 PM] | ||
^ Top | |||
Barry Cohen![]() Icon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1844 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
We'll be updating the TP very soon (maybe even this week) to allow the latest IB version. Until we do it remains supporting 9443b. Also know that this upcoming TP will also support future IB updates. | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark G![]() Member ![]() Posts: 41 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
I have two real IB accounts and the one offered paper account. In my AWS instance, I currently have ONE IBGateway paired with ONE TP trading into an IB paper account with my primary user logon. IB allows only one user to log into the paper account. Period. Now I want to set up AWS for my two linked real accounts. I will be using my "first and primary" logon to access the two accounts from my desktop via the web for monitoring, etc. Now this is where it gets confusing to me: Is it correct that to access real money account "A" via an IBGateway in the AWS instance I have to set up a "second user", and to access real money account "B" via an IBGateway in the AWS instance I have to set up a "third user"? Hope this makes sense . . . The fragility of all of these moving parts makes me feel far removed from the KISS principle. I'm feeling less simple, and more stupid. And hope nothing breaks. --Mark G. | ||
^ Top | |||
Steve2![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 750 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Annapolis, MD ![]() |
That's correct. You'll need a different userid for each IB Gateway. If you plan to run the IB Gateways in the same AWS instance, don't forget to configure different port numbers for each IB gateway/TP pair so each TP will talk to the correct IB gateway. Steve | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark S![]() Regular ![]() ![]() Posts: 56 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Barrington, IL ![]() |
I too am trying to configure a new AWS/IB Gateway/TP trio for a second account. I kept getting an error notice that TWS was not installed, and now I realize that must be because the current TP does not recognize IB 965, correct? But then I tried to download 9443 but the signature is corrupt and I can't. What's up with that, is there anything I can do to get auto-trading working? My first account is doing fine. It's got IB 954 installed, interestingly. I don't see where I can download that. | ||
^ Top | |||
SteveL![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 189 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Boulder, CO ![]() |
Mark - Another alternative is to setup a Family/Advisor account, link the existing accounts to that Family/Advisor account, and then do your "first and primary" logon using that account. From that account, you can give trading authority to the "client" accounts. In this scenario, you don't have two logins associated with each account. Rather, you have an "Advisor" account which has authority to all your linked client accounts for monitoring, trading, etc., and each client account (if they've granted trading authority by the master/advisor) logs in with their existing login credentials. This is a total of 3 accounts, and 3 login ids. One caveat: You cannot connect OT, VT or TP through the master/advisor account and trade (it'll connect, but you get weird results and responses - OT, VT and TP do not understand the 2 level account structure). Check it out. I find it very convenient for monitoring multiple "client" accounts (e.g. my IRA, Roth IRA, spouse's IRAs, etc.). | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark S![]() Regular ![]() ![]() Posts: 56 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Barrington, IL ![]() |
Yes, I already have the Family/Advisor setup. But I still need to set up each individual account with it's own IB/TP pair through an AWS instance, correct? Then I can log into the Master account and monitor or over-rule OV/TP in each account from the Master. | ||
^ Top | |||
SteveL![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 189 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Boulder, CO ![]() |
Correct. | ||
^ Top | |||
SteveL![]() Veteran ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 189 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Boulder, CO ![]() |
Mark S. My understanding (and will be doing it this week) is that you can run multiple TP/Gateway combo on a single AWS instance. At present, I have two AWS instances trading two accounts (one is a OP/Gateway combo, the other a TP/Gateway combo), and monitoring from an Advisor account. I'll be adding another TP/Gateway combo to the AWS server already running a TP/Gateway combo. [Edited by SteveL on 5/10/2016 9:23 PM] | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark S![]() Regular ![]() ![]() Posts: 56 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: Barrington, IL ![]() |
Success!! I realized that I had IB 954 on my first AWS instance, and copied it over and it works. So I'm in business! | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark G![]() Member ![]() Posts: 41 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
I have OV w/ an Elite Trader feeding TP-IBG in ASW, trading into an IB paper account for now, in order to learn the ropes before committing to my real-money IB accounts. Everything has been working good with the following exception: A trade in RXL was automatically entered on 4-29-16, but the exit failed to execute on 5-10-16. *FOUR* brokers at IB gave me consistent and additive information about the 'whys and wherefores'. That is a story for another day. The bottom line is that the trade thus became *UNMANAGED*, and TP has allowed the trade to *CONTINUE* to be unmanaged. The trade shows up as unmanaged on each and every daily TP Broker Report. Here is today's report: And here is today's actual account statement of trades right from IB: It is a mystery to me, I do not know why, and consequently cannot trust the system with real money until I gain an understanding of what is going on. I *think* that I have TP properly set up to automatically take care of unmanaged and orphaned trades at 3pm EST each and every trading day: Beginning with the RXL failed exit day, the first opportunity for TP to automatically make a correction was later on that Tuesday the 10th at 3pm, then on Wed-Th-Fr-Mon-Tues(today). That is 6 failed opportunities. What am I missing?? --Mark G. [Edited by Mark G on 5/17/2016 1:48 PM] ![]() ![]() ![]() | ||
^ Top | |||
Barry Cohen![]() Icon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1844 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
It's due to a bug with the Close All Orphaned setting not working if Close Unmanaged was also enabled. It's fixed in the new TP update 4D that was just released. | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark G![]() Member ![]() Posts: 41 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
I am happy to report that the very next day after installing the new IBG-TP software, the trade became managed right on schedule! Thanks, Barry. --Mark G. | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark G![]() Member ![]() Posts: 41 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
FYI, there is a tolerable quirk in the latest IBG that goes hand-in-hand with the new TP 4D. The new "feature" is a pop-up warning message whenever the new IBG signs into a paper trading account. Acknowledging the message closes it until the next IBG sign-in. This is where things get interesting. I have been using RDC to check my AWS set up in the afternoons. Every afternoon after installing the new IBG build I have noticed this message, acknowledged it, the message went away, but I would see it again the next time I returned. All morning trades were executed with the message showing, and AFAIK, there hasn't been any interference to IBG-TP operation. I called IB and talked to a fellow in the API group who explained to me something that I never knew: When the IB servers are reset every midnight, not only is TWS turned off, but all IBG's are turned off, too! The difference is that the IBG's *AUTOMATICALLY* log back in, thus the repeated appearance of the warning message for PAPER accounts. He said that there is no option to not display the message again, that it is part of the new IBG landscape Something else: IBG signs into real-monied accounts automatically, too, *EVEN WITH DOUBLE AUTHENTICATION* It's all part of the magic . . . --Mark G. [Edited by Mark G on 5/24/2016 3:59 PM] ![]() | ||
^ Top | |||
Barry Cohen![]() Icon ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1844 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
I do not like that popup message either. When I talked to their support about it a few weeks ago they told me there is no option to suppress it. I really hope they add a setting for that. | ||
^ Top | |||
Mark G![]() Member ![]() Posts: 41 Joined: 10/11/2012 ![]() |
Yes, I very specifically asked them about having an option to suppress it, but was told that there were no plans to do so . . . "part of the new landscape" . . . At least it doesn't seem to do any harm just letting it sit there every day. --Mark G. | ||
^ Top | |||
Jim Dean![]() Elite ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1059 Joined: 10/11/2012 Location: L'ville, GA ![]() |
My guess is that they are subtly (or not so subtly) trying to discourage people from using paper accounts for extended periods. |
Legend | Action | Notification | |||
Administrator
Forum Moderator |
Registered User
Unregistered User |
![]() |
Toggle e-mail notification |