IB - bid / ask E-mini S&P

P

paulus

Hi,

since last friday i have a large spread on the S&P mini varying from 0.5pt to 0.75pt's ! is this a problem for IB customers only
or does this problem have nothing to do with IB ?
started trading only 7 months ago and never experienced this problem before (almost always had a 0.25pt spread)

regards,

paulus
 
Are you on the June contract, ES M3? You should be on the Sept contract, ES U3 which is now the front month as of last Thursday.
 
oeps must be it !
did only one roll-over so far;
rollover is one week before expiration ?
excuses from a newbie !

regards,
paulus
 
solves also the problem i had with the volumes ( on the june contract ) ; thanks again for responding to my post
paulus
 
I notice that the tick increment on the emini S&P is .25 while the tick increment on the pit s&p contract is .10.

How can this be?
The emini is at least twice as liquid as the pit contract!

Is there a contract that I can switch to in order to have a .10 tick increment in the emini?

Why would the CME hobble smaller traders with a tick increment/slippage that is 2 1/2 times as large as the pit contract?

There must be some mistake, no?

:D
 
"BIG S&P"
Ticker Symbol SP
Contract Size $250 times S&P 500 futures price
One Tick=.10 index points = $25 per contract

"E Mini S&P"
Ticker Symbol ES
Contract Size $50 times E-mini S&P 500 futures price
One Tick=.25 index points = $12.50 per contract

This should answer your Question!



http://www.cme.com/
 
Quote from Ebo:

"BIG S&P"
Ticker Symbol SP
Contract Size $250 times S&P 500 futures price
One Tick=.10 index points = $25 per contract

"E Mini S&P"
Ticker Symbol ES
Contract Size $50 times E-mini S&P 500 futures price
One Tick=.25 index points = $12.50 per contract

This should answer your Question!
More...

So if I understand you correctly you are saying that in dollar equivalent terms comparing one Big S&P ($250) and five E Mini S&P (5 X 50= $250), the tick increment and minimum automatic slippage is:

"Big S&P" - (1 X 25) = $25
"E Mini S&P" - (5 X 12.50) = $62.50

That doesn't seem right. I always thought tick increment/spread was suppose to be determined by liquidity. Since the E Mini S&P is more liquid - it defies logic that it should trade in a larger tick increment/spread/slippage?

.
 
Tick increment/size is a function of the contract specification, and is set by the exchanges, and is not a result of the contract liquidity. You are confusing tick size with the bid/ask spread, which is a function of liquidity.
Jessie
 
Dude:
Why are you challenging me?
All I did was quote The CME information.
I did not decide what increment Big S & P s trade in.
It is a very simple concept.
The BIG S&P is 5 E Minis.
1 E mini is 1/5 a BIG Contract.
Maybe you should contact the CME and tell them to start trading S&Ps in pennies so you can afford to buy one Contract!
I do not understand your logic or lack of?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top