IB now forcing traders to cross spread in OTCBB stocks

[MoreLeverage]

You can use AON orders, and get the 2500 of nothing. What do you think?

No, you can't. Aside from AON orders getting generally poor execution, IB does not support the AON order type for OTC markets:

https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=577

 

[truetype]

Email ibmgmt (at) interactive brokers.com so that the higher ups can consider your angst.

Obviously IB doesn't want to encourage trading oddlots of penny stocks. Similarly, on another thread it became clear IB doesn't want to encourage trading vol derivs. But there are many slow learners on ET who don't understand that.

 

[Sig]

Obviously IB doesn't want to encourage trading oddlots of penny stocks. Similarly, on another thread it became clear IB doesn't want to encourage trading vol derivs. But there are many slow learners on ET who don't understand that.

For Pete's sake, here it is again with "IB knows best, who are you to question their Almighty wisdom as a mere customer" bullshit. Seriously, it's the customer who is a slow learner when IB arbitrarily implements a rule that makes little sense that they themselves can't rationally explain? WTF?

 

[truetype]

The point is, like any business, IB prefers certain types of customers, and has less use for others.

 

[Shadetree42]

2,500 shares at 40¢ is a thousand bucks. If that's a "big" position, you shouldn't be trading OTCBB. Heck, probably no one should be.

What about "partial fill" do you not understand?

 

[Shadetree42]

Obviously IB doesn't want to encourage trading oddlots of penny stocks. Similarly, on another thread it became clear IB doesn't want to encourage trading vol derivs. But there are many slow learners on ET who don't understand that.

Did you just start trading this month? read the thread. IB has in fact catered to penny stock traders (esp. on the short side) since the beginning. They make ~50 bps a trade no matter what size it is. It's the MM who doesn't want to people to use limit orders, for obvious and selfish reasons. BTW, 2,000 shares is not an "odd lot."

 

[Shadetree42]

The point is, for penny stocks the required position sizes are small change, typically <$1,000.

It's not position size; it's order size. You get filled on 2,000 shares one day, and effectively you cannot trade out of it the next day -- unless you try to get 2,500 more shares first.

 

[Shadetree42]

As recently as 18 months ago, IB used to allow use of their in-house stock trading algos (VWAP, TWAP, etc.) with penny stocks. I.e., it would piece out limit orders over a period of time if you told it to be passive. I used it for seven years without so much as a peep from anyone. That's how drastically things have changed.

 

[truetype]

It's the MM who doesn't want to people to use limit orders, for obvious and selfish reasons.

And if IB wanted oddlot pennystock business, they'd tell the MM to go pound sand. Think about it from a business perspective.

 

[Shadetree42]

And if IB wanted oddlot pennystock business, they'd tell the MM to go pound sand. Think about it from a business perspective.

Why would they want to lose penny stock trading revenue? There is no reason they would. Rather, they are being pushed around by one of the few MM games in town. I'm sure there is a ton of complexity in their various contracts that none of us will ever know, but there is no way IB mgmt. suddenly woke up one day and decided they had no interest in collecting commission for transmitting orders.

Also, it might interest you that in many of these names, what you erroneously call an "odd lot" -- say, 2,000 shares -- can easily be 20% of the ADV. That's what makes this policy so absurd.