The all-in-One trading terminal for Stocks, possible Bloomberg Terminal alternative

Discussion in 'Trading Software' started by BoyPlunger323, Sep 9, 2019.

  1. I would like to know your opinion about a project I'm dreaming now for months or even years. I'm currently studying economics and have access to a Bloomberg terminal, I recognized a big gap between the institutional tools and the tools for individuals. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe i just could not find the right tools, but I'm trading now for a couple of years and I found a few usable software like E*Trade Pro, TWS, ThinkOrSwim or Ninjatrader. But if you are honest none of these tools is really great and have all the information you really need to trade. (depending on your strategies of course) All the softwares have their advantages and disadvantages, like ThinkOrSwim for Options or Ninjatrader for futures but none of them is really perfect for Stocks. If you never worked with Bloomberg before, it's all integrated and you don't need anything else, literally. The only software that i know, that really try it to become the all-in-one solution is StocksToTrade. But i really think their biggest "advantage" is their aggressive marketing campaign. I tried it for two weeks and the experience I got there was not great but alright. The price was in my opinion a bit to high for that experience I got there.

    I have connections to a few very excellent software engineers from the MIT, and they are really into it. They told me that it's not that difficult to write such a "perfect" software the biggest problem in their opinion is the broker integration. Do you think it could be an unsolvable problem? The second problem is the budget, in order to make the software perfect the budget must be at least a few hundred thousand dollars. Do you think that Trading Terminal would be a possible KickStarter project? And could raise at least $250k?
     
  2. ZBZB

    ZBZB

  3. Could it compete on cost with all of those alternatives? Many are free, and many more are very inexpensive. There are significant ongoing expenses involved with such a service as Bloomberg Terminal.
     
  4. There are lots of data providers that offer better data than Bloomberg. The reason why Bloomberg is still around is because of the networking ability. If I want to share data with a PM at firm XYZ, I can send him BBG data because he will most likely be subscribed. When I did the BMC they said there were 250,000 terminals globally being used everyday.

    BBG also gives you access to third party vendors. For example, I can integrate ORATS data with the terminal. This is a really nice feature that allows you to go beyond BBG's enormous data set.

    Lastly, BBG employs thousands of people, some of them are uploading new excel templates every single day! Others are sitting by their desk waiting to give you top tier service. This will be very hard to beat when you are starting out.

    In short, BBG has stood the test of time, even with all the "better" data providers trying to take over the space. Nothing is impossible, but it might be a bit easier if you get hired by Bloomberg and put a bug in their system, rather than going up against them with a few SWEs and 250k!

    On a side note, what value are you trying to bring to the market? Are you trying to create a cheaper BBG and/or are you trying to create a better BBG? What have you found that was flawed with BBG right now? People in the industry are willing to pay up for a good product; Which is why a terminal starts at 2k/mo. Maybe you guys should raise your own capital by creating a smaller product that fits in well with the current market demand and build your way up. That way, you will also learn a ton! Jumping in on a massive idea like this (without having previous experience of selling software) will most likely discourage you once it fails.
     
  5. Thanks for the inside I got your point. The initial idea of the project was that we create a cheaper BBG for the individual trader. We don't want to make a better bloomberg, our budget and our connections are far from sufficient.
     
  6. def

    def Sponsor

    Bloomberg does have a place on most brokerage and trading firms and while some use it, it normally is not the main platform for trading. As TheBigShort says, they have a bit of a monopoly on the messaging. The order entry is not fast (although you can use EMSX if you wish) relative to what is out there and of course the price is very dear. You certainly won't find it easy to trade global asset classes and multiple products on one screen with fast order entry for example.

    The IB TWS offers entry for all product classes and with hot keys, basket trader, algos and more, does the job and yes, the TWS does sit on many institutional desks. But there is no one size fits all so if you believe you can design something better, I'd say go for it but keep in mind your design would most likely fit your needs and not necessarily the masses. For example at many institutions you have one person or team trading one product or sector. Each team will have their own needs and concerns. There is a plethora of really good front ends in the market - many of which have designed for TWS via our API. The key though is that many of them are tailor made for specific needs or products. We have serious "power users" who connect via CTCI others, who do it all from TWS classic, others Mosaic and others who via basic excel APIs to others using 3rd party front ends or sophisticated APIs they wrote on their own.

    Also keep in mind there is a lot more to order entry. I for one believe the real power is the execution quality and work going on behind the scenes (taxes, corporate actions, data management, database management, stock loan, etc, etc). Depending on the end users needs, these important items need to be addressed within the design of the platform. In short, while I have little doubt you and your team can design a great front end, I highly doubt you'll come up with the holy grail.
     
    helpme_please and BoyPlunger323 like this.
  7. ZBZB

    ZBZB

    If a company has one Bloomberg then they can get Bloomberg Messaging for unlimited users for $10 a month per user. They are competing with Symphony which is $20 per user per month.
     
    def and GRULSTMRNN like this.
  8. This post is funny and cringe worthy on so many levels I fail to count them all. Yes, definitely it's doable within a few weeks and around 100k. Tons of others have tried and succeeded and they are all billionaires by now. You should definitely do it to get rich quick.

     
    fan27 and def like this.
  9. henry76

    henry76

    Dear Gulfstream , sarcasm is your forte.
     
  10. tonyf

    tonyf

    I say go for it. Bloom started loosing their grip in Europe. We ditched them for Reuters Eikon and have never turned back (Eikon messanger is open for all all and free, a still insignificant but growing threat to Blomm messaging). If you were to drill the Bloom Terminal down to 1 "Moat", it is the messenger - everything else is not worth it really.
    So it makes sense for sell side - buysider have started shifting away already.

    A heavily discounted self-service modular Bloom (where base is free for example, and you pay for add-ons like data, adv. charting, ECN, etc....) and plug to any broker you want is certainly welcomed.

    Now IB (whom I love and work exclusively with) won't appreciate it as it commoditise order execution. IB is terrible in Europe (fees are sky high and near 0 access to large order books). A solution that allows you to pick and choose who you can execute with on a trade-by-trade basis is guaranteed to win.

    I would beta test if offered....

    Tony
     
    #10     Sep 9, 2019
    ZBZB likes this.