IB fill reporting DELAYED

if you trying to login and IB servers are down(in weekend for example) and you click on OK button there some sort if message start periodically blinking. ok, i assume mean that mean servers are down and you not able to login. not a problem-just click on cross on corner to close login window. no no no... not so fast... the message will pop up anyway, even if log on window was closed already. and you not going to find a this programm in windows task manager to shut down. time to restart my computer once again!

 

Bob, just kill IE task, or the Java task if running standalone

 

1- When the order does not come back to you as filled, there is a fundamental problem with their system. All orders come back thorugh NQDS, a dedicated line that b/d's must have in place with Nasdaq and SIAC with NYSE. If they blame it on someone other than themselves, that would mean that all of their customers got turned by the Phillips head. Which is still ridiculous.

2- Problems like that were commonplace in the mid-to late 90's, now ITS UNACCEPTABLE.

3- Call them, and ask for the "GENERAL SECURITIES PRINCIPAL, or the Series 24", and as diplomatically as you can, tell him/her that you've been fleeced and you intend on filing a complaint with the NASD. Watch how fast the song changes to the Mamas and The Papas.

4- Their system should have NEVER, EVER, NEVER, EVER, allowed you to put in another sell, which make you NET SHORT. I've helped execution platforms, and rule number one is don't allow a second order on the same side, if the first one didn't come back.

Either way you're in the right. Don't let that crap happen.

Let me know what happens, or if you need more advice.

Best,

 

Next time that crap happens, hit the "Prnt Scrn" key. Then open MSFT Paint, hit "edit" and then "paste" tehn save as either a .jpg or .gif. You'll now have a screenshot of the problem, they tell you doesen't exist.

 

Pretzel,

I had problems with fills at the same time and similar prices. The difference in our outcomes was that as soon as I got the magenta, I pulled up live chat and they told me they had lost their connection to GLOBEX. They didn't have an estimated time to resolution and I felt a bit like I was hanging in the breeze. However, just as I was about to hedge with some YM, my order went through. I got some extra ticks on the position I was trying to close, but missed out on another winner. I figured it was about a push. I think the whole affair lasted about 3 minutes.

I don't have any advice regarding the late report of a trade beyond saying "that sucks", but my point is that the live chat did work and I at least had a good enough handle on the situation to know not enter more orders for the ES and that I could hedge with the YM since ACE was not affected.

Like an earlier poster said, call it tuition and move on. It happens.

Shreddog

 

I'm sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about. Orders might get reported through the tape but tell me, how can a broker be 100% certain that an order reported on the tape is for a specific client with a specific order id. The orders get reported back to the API from the exchange. In this case we had a loss in communication to the exchange for a minute or so. I'm not sure if it was a server on our end, their end, a phone line, etc. We have a number of lines and servers going to globex so not all clients were affected. During any down time if an exchange sends an order and not acked, an API will not receive the info. How such a situation is handled will vary from exchange to exchange as they have different software and protocols. Some are supposed to resend messages until they get acked, others require firms to read from the clearing database and keep track of things on their end etc. Somehow pretzels order did not get acked properly and the magenta color on the screens means an order is waiting to be acked. A call/chat to the help desk would have helped solve things faster. IB's policy is that if an execution is consistent with the order entry, the client is responsible. We don't differentiate between winners and losers and the order given to him could have just as easily been a winner.

We are also talking about FUTURES here not equities. if the client has enough margin in their account, they can place multiple orders.

BTW, I'm a registered series 24. While I was not involved with this order and do not have complete specifics, I bet if I had them all I'd be comfortable that we handled the event according to our agreements and according to exchange regulation.

 

The market had already traded thru Pretzel´s limit price (and filled his limit order), when he hit CANCEL. Globex will respond to his cancel request with some message like "No order in book". TWS should forward this message to customer. Customer will be smart enough to draw the conclusion that his order might have been filled already.

 

def- you're right, there is no way to tell which order on the tape belongs to a customer. However, I have been on the trading and trading firm end of trades, as Series 24 as well. Every single order that goes to the market (Nasdaq and listed) has an order id. This number is specific to the customer that entered it, that number is generated by the b/d, and is then it's read by the respective exchange (Nasdaq and NYSE has 8 digit a/n #), with another number added to it. The purpose of two ID #'s is, regardless of what side is responsible, the either side can track down the trade, and get an answer for the client. The only one should enter a dupe, is the trade desk. Now speaking from Nasdaq, the clerk uses Nasdaq NWII, to enter the order ID in question which is on the customer's screen. Order ID either shows "Sent" or "Received" by the exchange. Sent means the order never got there, in most cases the b/d eats the trade, if received by the exchange and no subsequent report was sent, b/d will eat and fight with clear-thru or exchange rep to get it back. I did not know these were minis until I looked at image. However, one thing is for sure, if a customer is allowed to enter a duplicate order on same side, there is a fundamental problem with the software, you can't blame Globex, your the IB (introducing broker) for the trade. What do you expect a customer to do when they click and an order goes off into the abyss, wait? Until the flaw is fixed, the problem wil continue, and thats a shame, IB is branding nicely.

 

You can argue cases like this many ways but there are so many different variables here that you are not considering. For example, what if it was the internet connection on the client side that failed for a moment. The order id will help track down an order and the magenta image that doesn't change to red or green is a notification that something did not get acked and the desk should be contacted.

I also completely disagree with you about allowing a customer enter a second order on the same side. i say that we cater to the sophisticated trader. If you enter a sell order, it goes green and the market trades through you, the overwhelming odds are that you are filled. if you enter a second order without calling customer service you have to assume they want to increase their position. You fail to consider that we have many large institutional size accounts. they'd be more upset about being locked out of the market.

 

1)IB’s business model is based on the Internet. That means that IB must expect a moment of failure on the client side, every CCIE I’ve run into when leading the build of trading platforms spent much of their time figuring out the “What If’s” and planned for them. If they were choked by a budget, they trained their tech supports on how to handle. Other companies that offer the same take that into consideration, and that’s why they “STREAM” the information, or have balance loaded servers for outbound reports. No different than getting a web video/radio broadcast over the internet, and when the client side fails for a moment, the information is received when the client side is resolved.

2)I’ve worked as a market maker, institutional trader before trading full time, and Yes, I would get very angry if I couldn’t enter multi-same side orders when working and order or trading a side. However, the systems that I have worked with and help create built two distinct pipes, permissions and backends, one for retail and one for institutional. The distinction of “sophisticated” ended when direct access came on the scene. INCA used to be for “sophisticated” trader and they bought ISLD which started out as “unsophisticated”. Now “unsophisticated” is the trader who gets updated quotes from a newspaper.

I’m a veteran trader, and I have a “decent” handle on technology. So I say have two different permissions: one for the retail trader, and one for the “SOPHISTICATED” trader. Retail is happy, and instit is happy. Here’s what I told a team of programmers that built the very FIRST point and click direct access system, “Don’t guarantee me that it won’t happen again, just guarantee me that you’ll try fix it, to try and prevent it from happening again, and tell me you’ll look into it ASAP if it happens again”.