I see, with this in mind, I'll mention that I investigated what a low latency set up of interest to me would cost with Eurex earlier this year. I got this quote at the same time I started setting up for CME because I wanted to make sure I was choosing the appropriate first exchange to start with. Here's where I left off, maybe it doesn't apply very well to you, but happy to share: 1. Eurex is kinda difficult with 10 gig connections apparently, but 1 gig in colo is doable on the fairly-cheap. 2. TT is kinda a unique option in the whole low-latency-Eurex picture because you can install the TT exchange gateway on your server vs having to go to the nearest CQG gateway, which, presumably is LD4 unless you are there for some other reason. So being able to set up the gateway anywhere (AFAIK, I'm not a leading expert here) affords you a great amount of flexibility with TT because it allows you to choose data centers without regard for the platforms gateway location. I don't know if CQG will do this for not, if so, most of this is moot. You can get a quote for TT and I'm sure you have; the cost of this with an FCM competent to set it up will end up running up on you quickly when it's all said and done. My budget is quite tight as a college student though, so that's your judgement. It's not entirely out of your price range if your interest in CQG is any indication. 3. You can get a dedicated server with 1 gig connection in FR2 for only a few hundred a month, which is nice. I'm not sure the sales rep was entirely clear on my intentions, so that number might get carried away too. I was only just sketching this out getting quotes. 4. You will again be at the mercy of Eurex/FCMs/technology providers when it comes to getting a MD feed. I have no idea where TT is distributing data from in Europe, so you may be getting more than you bargained for when it comes time to get data. This set up will be under 1 millisecond, per my talks with a pretty competent FCM IT manager. It may be of interest to you as I believe this is the best low-latency-on-cheap set up I've seen thus far for Eurex. Alternative, and this would certainly be the first thing I would pursue, you could at least in get in touch with Rithmic and specify your situation and 5 millisecond level and see where it goes. They are very good at working out viable solutions for small clients, in my experience. I don't really record data or anything on European exchanges at this time, but just in the course of using Rithmic, I've become aware that they have a European gateway which ostensibly runs in the cloud as it has "aws" in the name. Rithmic serves clients who are much lower than 5 milliseconds, so maybe they can help you out. They will at the very least swing the bat for you with regard to data costs and reply to emails, which seems to be an issue. Costs are quite reasonable and they are knowledgeable. As an aside, this is just advice, given the mission critical nature of this venture and the costs, if CQG is giving you run around or not putting you in touch with the right people, that would be a huge problem in my eyes. At risk of sounding rude, I think it's very important for there to be accountability from data providers and FCMs as we have zero control of anything outside of our trading software by construction when we pay these service providers to take care of exchange connections, data, clearing, etc.
I spoke to the person at the FCM that apparently knows what the deal is with MD. She more or less confirmed what I had been hearing from CQG, that I'd need to subscribe to non-display data. BUT, after poking a bit further she told me this: if my FIX API program's 'front end' displays the pricing (which it does, or certainly could), then it by definition is being displayed and shouldn't require non-display data. She wasn't 100% confident about this; incidentally, it contradicts something she had told me earlier in the conversation: the reason that receiving the MD on my FIX API program requires non-display data is that, then, the exchange and vendors can't control what I do and to whom I transmit the data. I'd be interested to hear your take on this. Naturally, I have yet to be able to get an answer about this from CQG. It was even difficult to reach one of the many 'points' of contact that I'm supposed to deal with there. Instead of a point of contact, I have a whole line of contacts (and none of them know what the other's have told me, previously). I've even asked for a 'point of contact' and you wouldn't believe the response. I'm still bracing for the rude part! This won't be going on with CQG much longer. I don't have in-house programming people, so once I've already had the configuration and conformance work done, it's not as simple as just taking the few hours to refit it for a different connection. If I had any idea it'd be dragging on this long, I would have had it done a while ago though. With Rithmic and CTS - I'm getting the sense that they don't have servers in Europe. Is that a mistake? And also with Rithmic... does the fact that the FIX API is only for order routing, but the MD has to use the R API in conjunction with the R FIX API, complicate things?
I just got off the phone with Rithmic. For all practical purposes, they don't have servers in Europe. They're considering doing something in London.