Ok, I see. Thought it was automatic since a Lightspeed salesman gave me the non-display fees just for asking about the LTS API. Maybe I could LIE and say that I only want to develop some fancy charts (which by the way, it's true) but, eventually I want to pass the data to an algorithm. So I would have to take the risk and not declare all the uses I'm doing, right?
I've spoken with three companies about this, and I'm getting mixed opinions: First company made no distinction between professional and non-professional data use. If you have direct access to a real-time data feed, you are responsible for the fees. Second company. More towards the professional/non-professional argument. Fees do not apply a non-pro, provided that they are trading only for themselves, and not redistributing the data. Third company. Argued that their data is not a real time data feed, it is a volume-weighted average, somewhere between a delayed and real-time feed. Since non-display fees only apply to a real time data feed, non-display fees these fees do not apply to their customers. Perhaps everyone is looking for loopholes, and/or trying to figure out how this fee schedule applies to them and their customers?
Note that IB do not provide real-time tick data. Their data are a (slightly) delayed volume-weighted average, and so real-time non-display data feed fees would not apply.
You know what, I could create a derived data graph that tells me PLACE ORDER NOW!!! but I would do it manually. hehe, technically I wouldn't be generating automated orders. By the way, where is this sentence? "It [non-display] does not apply to the creation and use of derived data." Can you post the link?
The NYSE does seem to care what you do with the live data that will leave the display. They want to charge the fee.
Look you guys, maybe you can draw charts, maybe you can't. But the main purpose of an API is to place computer generated orders and that's what most of us are doing. They are working their way up the food chain. Last year it was the pure data vendors that went through the audits. Now they are starting in on the brokers. Lightspeed was first. But you can bet they are coming after IB. The SEC really dropped the ball on this one. You can't justify healthy market structure if you are forcing out players in droves.
Joan: https://www.ctaplan.com/publicdocs/ctaplan/notifications/trader-update/CTA Network A Pricing - Jan 1 2015.pdf Bottom of page 3: Non-Display Use refers to accessing, processing or consuming data, whether delivered via direct and/or redistributor data feeds, for a purpose other than in support of the datafeed recipient’s display or further internal or external redistribution. It does not apply to the creation and use of derived data. IANAL. But the above sentence says to me that if you "derive data" then use it to trade, that is "use of derived data", and the "non-display" thing does not apply to it.
IB's data are a volume-weighted average, and that is not real-time tick data. Since non-display fees only apply to real-time tick data, and IB do not supply a real-time data feed, non-display fees do not apply to them or their customers. If you call and ask, they will tell you, "We are not a tick data provider. We do not supply a real-time data feed. To get this, you must buy data from a 3rd party data provider." That is the stone-wall, broken record answer. Practically speaking, IB data supplies 4 data points per second. It also comes in bursts; you will not get a nice steady drip of prices; a few seconds might go by, and you'll get 20 data points at once. As such, I suspect that it also falls into the "delayed" category. not 15-minute delayed, but delayed enough not to be "real-time"
Well, that's sort of good news, since at least IB will probably be left untouched. Their feed is not real time, but might be enough for many algos. I'm not really planning to do HFT nor anything similar. Is there anyone here day trading succesfully using only IB Market Data?