Here's the HP Z420.... equivalent to the Dell Precision T5810... available at Newegg.... $324.
Add your customization. No real need to spend more for a trading rig.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...4010&cm_re=HP_Z420-_-9SIAC0F59T4010-_-Product
Interactive Brokers Master Card
- Thread starter freedinner
- Start date
Here's the HP Z420.... equivalent to the Dell Precision T5810... available at Newegg.... $324.
Add your customization. No real need to spend more for a trading rig.
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...4010&cm_re=HP_Z420-_-9SIAC0F59T4010-_-Product
Well I wish that he could invest more money hiring better programmers aka software engineers though instead of launching this credit card. IB's platform is HORRIBLE!! It's so ironic that it's computer engineering that led to his wealth today and yet it's exactly the computer engineering of IB that he's neglecting.
That's a stupid statement. If a firm was going to internalize they cream at market orders as they can play the most games. I never use market orders but i suspect you get the pop-up warning on filters capping. You can tick the box off not to receive that warning.
You can tick off the box to not receive the warning, but IB will still cap the price of your order regardless. Their price capping algorithm is so stupid, I have had several cases where you would not believe how stupid it is. I have complained and IB does not admit that it is stupid and does nothing about it. If it ever costs serious money to me, I will go to arbitration against them and win easily. That's how stupid their algorithm is.
Watching Thomas Peterffy’s video message (link in first post) a couple of times, the following crossed my head:
— Could it be that IB is overly aggressive with price capping (above and beyond what is required by exchanges) in a misguided attempt to reduce those orders’ negative impact on the self-reported „monthly execution stats“ cost figure, that seemingly has been elevated to final yardstick? —
In those stats, IB adds commission cost + market impact, and that is defined as trade price vs. VWAP. In other words, it seems IB books it's clients' daily profit of new positions (vs. VWAP) or PL of day trades against its commissions to arrive at this number.
Orders that are dis-allowed by the price capping mechanism are usually aggressive orders that, if executed, might make this stat look worse.
I doubt that is the goal. I suspect the goal is an attempt to alleviate "fat finger" errors. However, when there are liquidity events and you really need to get out of a position, IB essentially tells you that it knows better than you on whether you should be allowed to liquidate. It is absolutely insane in certain instances.
You have to call in by phone and talk to a human in order to lift the cap, at which time the price that you may receive may be far far worse than if IB had just let you execute the order. There is no way to tell the IB TWS that "I really really want to execute this order at this price." You have to call in to get the order done and who knows how long that will take.
99% of the time, this capping algorithm won't make a huge difference. However, 1% of the time, you'll have a situation where IB is going to cause traders to lose a significant amount of money because of their idiotic implementation of their capping algorithm.
I don't think so. For this, they have the simple warning message "Chosen limit price is more than 3 percent above / below last price / bid / ask etc."
Well, I know exactly what you are talking about. In some cases, I was even told by chat that the price cap cannot be lifted in any circumstances not even by IB staff themselves.
What exactly was the price cap trade you are objecting to.
Details
Details