Both of these languages share a common beginning, but I have read Multicharts' extension to their version is supposed to have some good algo features. A London outfit, QuantSavvy, has an interesting take with their comparison between TS, MC and NinjaTrader. TradeStation came out on top in their review ... with a surprising statement about fills from TS Brokerage in comparison with IB supposedly in side by side testing. https://quantsavvy.com/blog/algorithmic-trading-software-reviews MultiCharts seems quite capable in itself with quite an array of 3rd party add-ons. TradeStation's EasyLanguage is everywhere and their "fill advantages" over IB/others that QuantSavvy speaks to needs some corroboration. Tradestation's monthly $150 activity penalty TS charges if you don't top 4999 shares traded just about eliminated them for me on first read. A fixed monthly penalty vs some annual number is a pretty big negative in my view as trading conditions do change ... sometimes significantly. What are the benefits/weaknesses of each of these languages that a trader would encounter building basic to medium complexity mechanical trading systems? Does TradeStation Brokerage really have a fill advantage over IB? Who did you choose and what was your big benefit? All thoughts, suggestions, opinions and first hand experiences appreciated!!! T
I have not used TradeStation but did evaluate MultiCharts before deciding on AlgoTerminal. I quickly hit a wall with MultiCharts in that working with multiple time-frames in a single strategy was a pain in that you had to have those time-frames tied to an open chart. While I like AlgoTerminal it is not really priced for most retail traders. However, I know they are working on a new version which will be more "retail friendly".
I use multicharts with IB. I run medium-to-low complexity scripts; I think they're mostly compatible with EasyLanguage, though some (like currenttime_s) aren't. I haven't encountered the issues with multiple time-frames the above commenter notes, at least not in MC's Portfolio Trader (though it is annoying that you have to use your lowest-resolution chart for executing trades ... but I believe that's an EasyLanguage thing). No idea about fill advantage. IB does have different routing algorithms for maximizing fill vs. rebate. But also, if you do automated trading, you'll likely hit 4999 shares easily ... that's only 50 trades of standard 100-share blocks. In the end, use the platform you're most comfortable with ... I doubt that language restrictions or fill differences between them will make a meaningful difference to even advanced retail traders.
Multiple time frame trading wasn't in our immediate stack, but I could see the technique as very valuable. I will look into that further. Will also look at AlgoTerminal. Appreciate the suggestions! T
Lowest res chart for trading is a curve ball I didn't expect, but for immediate work that likely wouldn't be a show stopper. I used TWS a good number of years back with no real problems. The 90% number raised my eyebrows a bit, but I haven't seen any sign of serious ET members' complaints about IB fills so I almost think there is something odd going on with QuantSavvy. Maybe something to do with their location in London. Hard to tell. Probably just time to direct test. Thanks for your info/thoughts!! T
A scrape from their review near the bottom: Not an insignificant claim ... certainly I would like to see more context about that. https://quantsavvy.com/blog/algorithmic-trading-software-reviews
Yeah, that's interesting. Would like to see more detail about what they mean by "better fill." I've been happy with IB's fills, but I've been with them for long enough that I don't have much to compare them to.