CSI no longer provides clean data

[mike168]

The following is my personal experience of how CSI is "committed" to provide accurate and clean data:
In early this month I found that the CSI commodity number 119 (HSI) has several MONTHS of missing contracts between Mar 1989 to Jan 1991. I sent an email to CSI for investigation. Their answer was their database department found "no records of these contracts to have ever traded".
I looked up the Hong Kong Exchange web site myself and found that the exchange themselves sell the whole database of HSI for only HK$600. I emailed CSI again and direct them to the HKEX website for the data. After several days still no action was taken. I sent another email to CSI to ask them what happened. Their answer was they will not add the missing data, without any further explanation.
If you look up the CSI data for HSI, you could see a whole lot of missing data and large gaps within this period.
The conclusion: CSI no longer provides clean data. Period.

 

[horribilicus]

If you think that's bad, read this.

 

[EatShootLeave]

CSI is very sketchy. The programmers are clueless -- lots of installation errors because of the letter of the hard drive and stupid failures just trying to install the database from CD (they use an old DOS installation procedure, so they compute the available hard drive space wrong).

Unfair Disadvantage!

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from EatShootLeave:

CSI is very sketchy. The programmers are clueless -- lots of installation errors because of the letter of the hard drive and stupid failures just trying to install the database from CD (they use an old DOS installation procedure, so they compute the available hard drive space wrong).

Unfair Disadvantage!

Agreed.

Is there a free source of stock or futures data that doesn't have those problems?

 

[horribilicus]

Quote from kut2k2:

Is there a free source of stock or futures data that doesn't have those problems?

There isn't a paid source of stock or futures data that doesn't have those problems, what makes you think a free one exists?

 

[Willleung]

Quote from mike168:

The following is my personal experience of how CSI is "committed" to provide accurate and clean data:
In early this month I found that the CSI commodity number 119 (HSI) has several MONTHS of missing contracts between Mar 1989 to Jan 1991. I sent an email to CSI for investigation. Their answer was their database department found "no records of these contracts to have ever traded".
I looked up the Hong Kong Exchange web site myself and found that the exchange themselves sell the whole database of HSI for only HK$600. I emailed CSI again and direct them to the HKEX website for the data. After several days still no action was taken. I sent another email to CSI to ask them what happened. Their answer was they will not add the missing data, without any further explanation.
If you look up the CSI data for HSI, you could see a whole lot of missing data and large gaps within this period.
The conclusion: CSI no longer provides clean data. Period.

Mike,

Is it EOD or Intraday data? Would you mind posting the link to the HKEX exchange?

 

[mike168]

It's EOD. The web site is here:
http://www.hkex.com.hk/index.htm

 

[man]

i am using CSI and this is the first time i read a
serious complain about them. could it be due to
HSI being not much of a market end of eighties?

i thought CSI was the best out there with a great
price/value ratio ...

 

[mike168]

Every market is important to traders who trade them. I for one would certainly value accurate HSI data then Hog or lumber data. If CSI is not willing to CORRECT its database where such data is readily available and certified, one would seriously doubt the commitment of CSI to data integrity.

 

[kut2k2]

Quote from horribilicus:

There isn't a paid source of stock or futures data that doesn't have those problems, what makes you think a free one exists?

So what you're saying is, AFAYK there's no such thing as a clean data source.

Okie dokie.

Anybody else know of a clean data source, free or otherwise? At least cleaner than CSI (which I have confirmed is fairly dirty, based on what Yahoo spits out).