Any thoughts on if there are any significant differences in the order execution and fills you get between Tradestation and Interactive Brokers assuming you are not trading an HFT or automated strategy and instead trading discretionary? Just to start the discussion or help prompt comparisons, lets assume: 1. You are trading a 50-100 lot of options near the money on an equity with a moderately liquid options chain and setting a limit order at the mark. 2. You are trading a 10-20 lot of GC (gold futures) with a limit order 1-2 ticks from the currently traded price and the price trades up (or down) to your limit order. Clearly lots of scenarios on this one, but how about the price trades down to your bid and takes out half the bids before retracing back up. 3. You are trading a 10-20 lot of GC (gold futures) with a market order. Thoughts on the quality of the execution between these two brokers/platforms?
I don’t know the answer specifically but if no one else answers, I’d assume that fills would be identical if/once your orders get to exchanges. Only if your order first gets sent to market makers or HFT firms for “evaluation” then you might experience slippage. Tradestation does state they get paid for order flow: https://uploads.tradestation.com/uploads/sec-rule.pdf Though when you set reasonable limit and don’t get filled immediately then your orders should land at the exchange and there shouldn’t be any difference. Same if you direct your order directly to an exchange vs some “smart routing”. While when you do get filled immediately by a market maker, it still doesn’t guarantee getting a worse price than otherwise, but would need to be tested and compared.
At Tradestation you can choose direct market access. In that case I would assume the same fill between the two brokers.