Beware - critical flaw in IB Ideal Pro
- Thread starter TraderTony
- Start date
I guess you didn't get what they posted. We're talking about Spot forex. And the term market maker in spot forex is different than in other markets. The important distinction is that a market maker in spot forex is an operation set up to trade against each and every client's position. Ideal pro is set up like a quasi-ECN. It's just an order matching system. By the way you seem to understand it, when Idealpro matches your order with another customer, you'll brand that other customer a market maker simply because they were looking to do the exact opposite transaction of yours.
IB didn't deny that Timber Hill is a market maker. They denied that IdealPro is a market maker.
I don't see how you're getting "frequent" routings to TMBR in your forex transactions. Most trades are routed to the big three Forex banks IB uses as liquidity providers. UBS, DBFX, Bear. Are you routinely doing non-standard lots? <100k. Are you trading the less liquid pairs?
I know exactly what you and they are talking about. I, however, don't assign a different definition of Market Maker to spot forex. The mission is the same: "@#$% those guys" (ie customers). They are all out to know the market players' positions and take advantage. The world is not that big - surprisingly.
In other markets, if you don't designate and trade through some smart route it will travel to some algorithm of best price/best for your broker. I know that Timber Hill gets first crack at every order if they want it...
I like to see you call it a quasi-ECN because that is exactly what it is... I only trade the most liquid pairs, orders are not small according to them because I get shaded and my limits will move the market they show me at least. What a joke.. A real market with a real ECN would not move on my scale of orders to the market they make...
If you get inside the numbers it is so clear, so obvious.
In other markets, if you don't designate and trade through some smart route it will travel to some algorithm of best price/best for your broker. I know that Timber Hill gets first crack at every order if they want it...
I like to see you call it a quasi-ECN because that is exactly what it is... I only trade the most liquid pairs, orders are not small according to them because I get shaded and my limits will move the market they show me at least. What a joke.. A real market with a real ECN would not move on my scale of orders to the market they make...
If you get inside the numbers it is so clear, so obvious.
Answer: Too much name-calling and other irrelevancy. We (I) prefer to operate with serious traders who are trying to work WITH us to build the best possible platform. It is more efficient and productive.
This thread started with TraderTony describing a problem he experienced. As far as I can tell without searching through every post, his comments were accurate and appropriate. His problem was being reviewed outside of E-T and was evaluated on the merits of the problem, and not on what anyone said here. Based on what he posted, I believe his issue was resolved to his satisfaction.
I am aware of the problem with partials. It wsn't a problem when the platform was young and all activity happened against the banks. But as more clients actually trade with each other (and create 'partials' situtions), we have seen this 2-3 times. As long as the problem is reported promptly, we cover it. In the meantime, we have been working on a major release for the FX interface and the permanent solution will be included therein.
The comments about 'shading' and other such silliness aren't worth addressing. We have explained how the platform works in detail. Assuming one accepts the design statement as accurate, it is obvious that this does not happen.
Quote from cscott:
What does that have to do with forex orders getting executed that you did NOT enter?
The flawed IDEALPRO does not just affect small-sized trades. IDEALPRO's flaws affect trades of all sizes.
You didn't ask that question. You asked why some orders were not executed. I told you one of the reasons why.
Between "that I" and " never" and "Executed" I thought you accidentally left out the words "place" and "got".
Funny though, considering the type of poster you are, why haven't you posted about such a "flaw?" I did as that happened once early this year and IB corrected the problem promptly. See my early threads back in August.
In all seriousness, you are joking right?
How stupid do you think traders are?
Ok - Why does the entire bid/offer move off of one limit or market that is executed. And I am not talking about when the market is moving around at all. And please tell me the entire bid/offer moves for all customers - right. Yeah it is silliness to those who are not smart enough to see...
If CME/Reuters MarketSpace takes off - I can not wait. A broker that does not take 1 year to make an improvement will sweep market share...
Miami:
I like to think this is a technical glitch and not intentional on IB's part. Maybe I'm being naive. If IB really wanted to fix this they could open an account and throw several K in it. Then have one of their techs put in limit orders on IdealPro near or at the best bid/ask at different times of the day over a period of a few days and take note of what the spread does when it approaches those prices, and how often the price trades through their orders without getting a fill. They could probably have this fixed in a few days for minimal cost once they identified the problem. But IB seems to think its cusomters should be testers and bug fixers when live positions are on.
That sounds like a poor excuse. The only name-calling I noticed was by kiwi-trader. I believe most posters in this thread are serious about trading. Why can't you just ignore those 1 or 2 posters who do that, and answer the rest of us that are serious about a problem?
If you are not going to respond to a thread everytime kiwi_trader or someone else starts a fight with foul language, then posters will be lead to believe what another poster said was true - that kiwi_trader is an IB shill used to break up threads. Whether true or not, that will be the perception.