I heard someone a while back say that when you use the TWS API to submit trades you still have to do a manual confirmation of some sort before the trade goes through. Is this still true? If this is true, it seems to me the ability to mechanically auto-execute trades with API becomes impossible unless you are continuously watching and confirming each trade. Brutus
Def, We don't use IB anymore, so I can not check this myself, but I remember some posts about options requiring a confirm. If I am wrong then IB must be violating the manual intervention rule(s) in the option markets.
there are issues about non acceptance of automatic orders - but the definition is so difficult to achieve and enforce - that it is not impacting on trading - but there is a lot of weight to stop automatic orders
There are definitely issues, we are regularly accused of it, even though we have shown a number of our executing brokers our operation. The faster you are the more they complain. We had the AMEX fade us in one instance 10+ times in a natural market and then threaten to file a complaint about automated trading.
This is true, if you're trading options. It's required by the rules of the option exchanges, who want to restrict competition with their MMs by handicapping retail traders (further).
I assumed the question was related to stocks and/or futures. If I am not mistaken, the IB system itself will control the timing of orders sent to the options exchanges - i.e. no order on the same strike within X seconds.
I was just building the test socket client, and I noticed that get account info returns positions in my portfotlio that I have already closed. It says for example NQ size 0 value such and such. then when I buy ES it says ES size1, and NQ size 0, when I sell ES it is ES size 0 and NQ size 0. Not a big deal because you can filter these "size 0" position, but anyway... I thought that the closed positions should not be returned by the API? Regards Jaba