I don't think anybody is sitting around and waiting. I'm certainly not. Nor am I complaining. The initial question asked in this thread is basically, "What could they do better?" So, that was my answer.
Interactive Brokers API wishlist
- Thread starter globalarbtrader
- Start date
I don't think anybody is sitting around and waiting. I'm certainly not. Nor am I complaining. The initial question asked in this thread is basically, "What could they do better?" So, that was my answer.
How can your proposal make sense? You are basically trying to reinvent the wheel and not only that but you make some very dangerous proposals. Rest is designed to work for web requests (and web traffic, essentially). Perusing this technology for mission critical communication between a front end API and a trading server is possibly the worst idea imaginable.
I apologize if I spoke too strongly. I agree that there are better technical designs for their API. However, I do not believe it is the appropriate use of their resources (they could be adding material features for example), and I believe that there are considerations of robustness / risk / compliance which lead them to not revamp their API the way you have suggested.
Second all your points, but we should also be fair and consider how long their trading front ends and API is now in the market and working more or less stable. Anyone who has been with IB knows that their API was pretty mediocre in the stability department (and I can attest to a very robust FIX means of communication) but I have not heard nor experienced much on the negative side recently. Every API has its quirks and certainly there are couple annoying things with IB's approach but again, given for how long it has been running and how many asset classes, algo and order types it can handle, it is a pretty solid API imho.
According to some third party developers IB's API isn't reliable on reporting positions and it's worse when server side OCO's are used. That's about as essential as it gets with a brokerage API. I guess if one runs an automated system they have to keep one eye on TWS and have the phone number for IB on speed dial?
when, in 2001? IB is among several brokers I peruse in algorithmic trading and that for years now. I connect via FIX and most recently also added the C# API for some tests and both update positions on request perfectly well. I describe myself pretty well versed with TWS, the APIs (C# one as well as their FIX connectivity in particular) so if you can describe your problem in more detail I am happy to help. But keep in mind that third-party developers (especially certain retail charting and technical analysis vendors) often blame IB for what have you. It is true that in the past IB sometimes made breaking changes from one API version to the next but things have dramatically improved according to my experience and the feedback of my developers.
well, what "annoys" you in particular? I am more curious now what makes your list if you care to share...
"Annoying" is a pretty good word to describe the API's quirks
No offense taken. I think we're all in agreement, and I think you're probably right about risk and compliance, though having to have your program connect to their trading platform running locally on your machine seems like a needless complication that actually makes things less robust.