1000 QQQ SSF trading is better than NQ.

[Fohat]

Quote from Cdntrader:

Or am I missing something?

Yes. Commissions for trading NQ are 300% the 1000 QQQ ssf commissions, no matter how many contracts you trade.

QQQ SSF has 20% margin requirement (= 5:1 leverage), while NQ has up to 5% daytrading leverage.

If you want more than 5:1 leverage you can trade NQ and pay 300% the QKQ commissions. But why would you trade with more than 5:1 leverage? It's bad money management imo.
For example, if you use 10:1 leverage, an event (such as: war with Iraq, terrorist attack etc.) could halt trading and the market may gap 10% or more lower, triggering automatic position liquidation and whiping out your account. With 4:1 leverage you can survive 20% market drop.


Trading 5 NQ is equivalent to trading 4 QKQ, not to1, as you suggest:

Trading 5 NQ = trading 4000 QQQ shares = Trading 4 QKQ (1000 QQQ ssf)

Commissions for 5 NQ = 5*$2.40= $12, that's 3 times more than the commissions for 4 QKQ = $4.

If you switch from NQ to QKQ (1000 QQQ SSF), you'll pay 3 times less in commissions. That's big savings(instant profit).

That's why volume will pick up. When volume increases, spreads will narrow.

1 cent QQQ move = $10, when you trade QKQ futures. 10 cent move is $100 for 1 contract.

 

[Quah]

Why do you continue to ignore the tax advantage of NQ vs. the SSF?

That more than takes care of the difference in commissions - not to mention the savings in paperwork.

 

[saschabr]

qqq, 100, 1000, or even 10000 will never get even with the NQ
because liquidity will always be only in the NQ's.

the only solution which would make this discussion obsolete
would be if the CME would finally introduce real NDX futures
on globex. it's really time for this...

 

[Ditch]

I think it's about time the CME lowers it's fees on the e-mini's to a more apropriate level, let's say $1/contract

 

[Bullet]

CHEEKS,

HOOK EM HORNS!!

 

[Tech Analysis]

Quote from Ditch:

I think it's about time the CME lowers it's fees on the e-mini's to a more apropriate level, let's say $1/contract

Especially the NQ where we have to trade 2.5x as many contracts in order to get somewhere!

 

[SethArb]

this am but what is the symbol on IB for the new

1000 share QQQ SSF from
NQLX ?

 

[Cdntrader]

Quote from SethArb:

this am but what is the symbol on IB for the new

1000 share QQQ SSF from
NQLX ?

IB doesn't have it on the system. My guess is they are trying to figure out what the implications will be if they charge $1 a contract for such a large underlying value.

It might end up cannibalizing their NQ biz.

 

[Spark]

Quote from Fohat:

The 1k shares QQQ Single Stock Futures(SSF) contract(Sumbol QKQ), released recently, is potentially a much better trading instrument than the Nadaq 100 Emini futures NQ.

Lets compare them:

________________QKQ_______________NQ
| |
Commissions:_____$1/contract___vs.____$2.40 / contract
Underlying value:__1000 QQQ____vs.____800 QQQ shares


Therefore, trading one 1000 QQQ shares SSF contract, is equivalent to trading 1.25 NQ contracts with $1/contract commission.

Therefore, it's obvious that a trader will be more profitable trading 1000 shares QQQ SSF, than NQ.

Why should anyone continue trading NQ (= 0.8 QKQ) with 240% higher commission, instead of trading QQQ 1000 shares SSF for $1/contract?

The only reason, so far, is volume. But when more NQ traders will realize that they'll be more profitable trading 1000 shares QQQ SSF, QKQ volume will sharply increase, and probably surpass NQ.

But you can't trade QQQ 24 hrs as NQ does....

 

[Brandonf]

Quote from Ditch:

I think it's about time the CME lowers it's fees on the e-mini's to a more apropriate level, let's say $1/contract

Eurex has already done that. Fee's there are around $0.40 I believe, and there is no difference between members and non members. It will never happen in Chicago though as long as the floor controls what happens.

Brandon