esignal, what's all the beta-fuss?

stevet: “when esignal is better than cqg - they will charge more than cqg charge…”

I’ve been a CQG user for many many years. I recently began running Esignal/Ensign as a back up. I’ve had the opportunity to run CQGnet up against Esignal for a few months now and as far as the E-mini products are concerned I’ve not noted an appreciable difference in accuracy, rate, or availability of data.

CQG shines brightest when a trader considers its extremely slick software and customer service. However, CQG’s strengths no longer seem to justify its rather exorbitant pricing, especially given the advancement of some of the less expensive data/software providers. It has been my observation that many data/software providers are steadily closing the gap in areas once dominated solely by CQG.

 

Not to worry, its all ours - except the drawing tools they did come out of advanced GET - but we own the company. In fact GET will be available as an add in to eSignal in the future.

Plus, now with the addition of the eSignal Formula Script (EFS) in 7.0, we will be able to continue to provide new studies and features without doing a full release of the product. We are organizing a special group to continue to develop new studies. So continue to provide us with what additional formulas you are interested in.

Chuck
@eSignal

 

tymjr

since you are running two sets of data/software - with one as back up - i guess cost is not an issue for you!

and as you are still running cqg - i guess that means you still feel cqg is the best

other software companies can catch up, but there is a lot more to it than just adding a new technical device - its the real time use and presentation that counts - and that is why you pay what you pay for cqg

when the others equal it - cqg will get cheaper or the others will become more expensive

 

Chuck, isn't advanced get available now for esignal or are you suggesting the price is going to be reduced? As you already own it why don't you forget about the esignal software and just give everybody Advanced get? It's much better and will let you compete with qcharts and cqg.

 

stevet: “...you are still running cqg - i guess that means you still feel cqg is the best…”

Yes, from a software and customer support standpoint, I believe CQG is still the best. That has little bearing on my point, though, regarding the expense of CQG relative to its level of superiority in those areas. The degree of the benefit is no longer sizable enough to substantiate the costs as many data/software providers are steadily closing the gap in areas once dominated solely by CQG.

“…its the real time use and presentation that counts - and that is why you pay what you pay for cqg…”

Actually, I continue to use CQG mainly because I am simply familiar with it, which goes along way at my age, and the studies I've written in its funtional language and my fees are grand fathered. If I were a new trader, I doubt that I would seriously consider CQG given some of the current alternatives.

 

I switched back to Esignal this month because of all your comments about its "robust data feed" as I was getting a lot of interruptions with Qcharts. However I seem to be getting about the same amount of disruptions with Esignal so I think I can be pretty sure its the satellite that is the problem. I forgot how bad Esignals charting was. I will soon download the beta and see if its any better. If not, next month I will move back to Qcharts.

 

Has anybody had the problem of the incorrect data loading when you pull up a chart in esignal? I have to load the symbol 2-3 times on occasion before I get the correct data. I am checking it against a backup and at times the charts don't even look close. I look at a 5 min on amat for example, it gapped up and esignal shows it gapping down. It's just a different chart. It is happening throughout the day. Also the data seems to get hung up and the program stops showing prices and they freeze. Then they will start moving, ticking or showing the data again. Is there any way around either problem or am I the only one having this problem.

jj

 

i found that when esignal went wrong - it was impossible to get them to admit it was wrong or get any answers about incorrect data - and problems could carry on for months without anyone addressing them - its seemed to be a ship without a captain

do any high volume futures traders use real tick - and/or has anyone used real tick and cqg - so can make a comparison

 

tymjr

by your own words - the gap is closing - that indicates it has not closed

but i am real happy to try and find a better and/or cheaper alternative to cqg - which one should i use?

 

stevet: “by your own words - the gap is closing - that indicates it has not closed?”

I’m not sure if you are genuinely misunderstanding me or if you are on some misguided mission to win a battle of opinions. The point of both of my previous posts has never been anything remotely close to whether the gap between CQG and other data/software providers was indeed closed or not. Although it is ancillary, my comments regarding the gap between the companies only exists to support the point of the original post.

Once again, CQG’s strengths no longer seem to justify its rather exorbitant pricing. The degree of the benefit is no longer sizable enough to substantiate the costs as many data/software providers are steadily closing the gap in areas once dominated solely by CQG.

My statements reflect my view of CQG’s relative value. I have made no comment as to whether an individual company has completely closed the gap in all areas.