The best platform for futures?

riskless.
first call me a salesman if you wish, i run the asian operations of Timber Hill/IB. my main job is trading. I know enough about our systems and systems tradings to feel comfortable with my claims.

second, don't confuse the situation. I am in HK. Ofcourse routing from Chicago will be faster. My point is simply that I was able to get an order to the exchange and have it confirmed on my PC within .21 seconds when I did a test yesterday. Take out the latency between HK and Chicago and you are not faster.

third, if i can execute a trade from around the world within 200 milliseconds, i stand by the claim that there is no edge for someone trading manually closer to chicago. Perhaps if you're trading electronically it will make a difference. If that's the case, anyone can pop a lease line into IB or your firm and get the same speed.
 
Chicago exchange hit by Globex flaws
By Jeremy Grant in Chicago

The Chicago Mercantile Exchange's ambitions to expand electronic trading were dealt a blow on Wednesday as the exchange revealed that its flagship Globex platform had failed to cope with recent surges in futures volume.


The development comes at an embarrassing moment for the CME, whose plans for an initial public offering later this year are largely predicated on generating a substantial increase in revenues through greater use of electronic trading. Most of the CME's revenues currently come from "open outcry" pit trading.

Volume of futures trading on Globex has in recent weeks hit a succession of records as stock market and economic uncertainty have prompted investors to hedge risk in a range of futures products.

However the exchange, the second-largest futures market in the world, said late on Wednesday that during recent trading surges there were "several instances of connectivity problems or erroneous reports that affected some users of the platform". It did not elaborate.

The CME had identified the cause of the problems, which it had either corrected or was "in the process of addressing". The problems appeared to have occurred when volume reached over 1m contracts in a single day, with Wednesday being the third such occasion in the last month.

The setback has forced the CME to delay until October the introduction of its "Eagle Project", scheduled for next week. The project would allow the trading of calendar spreads electronically on Globex for the first time. Currently, calendar spreads - a complex trading strategy in the trading of eurodollar futures contracts - can only be traded through open outcry. The eurodollar futures contract is the CME's largest.

"Given the recent record volumes and the resulting stresses to the system, it is imperative that we prioritise our efforts to first ensure the continuous performance and efficiency of the platform before attempting to expand its use with a new major application," said Terry Duffy, CME chairman.
 
Originally posted by riskless
Wrong! Look at Line 1 tthough Line 3 and compare that to .21.

07:40:18:250 CME From Client
07:40:18:263 CME To CME
07:40:18:263 CME To Client
07:40:18:530 CME From CME
07:40:18:530 CME To Client
07:40:18:610 CME From CME
07:40:18:640 CME To Client

There is no comparison. I am not going to continue getting into this with DEF, because he is obviously an IB salesman. FFastFill is faster! There is NO DOUBT!

Ask him to show a log that completes a full turnaround with a fill!

If you care about speed, talk to people using FFastFill, not me, because I work there. I am very biased. Audit logs don't lie!
More...

What is the significance of these "faster fills"? Is this only applicable to automated systems?

I would imagine for discretionary methods that such small time variances would all even out over time.

Sometimes the worst fills make the best trades;)
 
TriPack: “The moral of the story is that a butterfly in Euro can cause a tidal wave in Chicago.”

Very witty Señor Lorenz.
 
Just put your full audit log for a complete trade and veritfy it! Don't make claims that IB is just as fast until you do so! I run FFastFill after trading for over 11 yeasr at a firm even larger than IB. I ran an Electronic trading group in London that dominates the Market, so I still see you as Salesman.
 
Originally posted by riskless
Wrong! Look at Line 1 tthough Line 3 and compare that to .21.

07:40:18:250 CME From Client
07:40:18:263 CME To CME
07:40:18:263 CME To Client
07:40:18:530 CME From CME
07:40:18:530 CME To Client
07:40:18:610 CME From CME
07:40:18:640 CME To Client

There is no comparison. I am not going to continue getting into this with DEF, because he is obviously an IB salesman. FFastFill is faster! There is NO DOUBT!

Ask him to show a log that completes a full turnaround with a fill!

If you care about speed, talk to people using FFastFill, not me, because I work there. I am very biased. Audit logs don't lie!
More...

I think the correct comparison is lines 1 to 5 not lines 1 to 3. Line 3 appears to be just the fast fill server sending the order to the CME and at the same time notifying the customer that it (the ff servers) has received the customer order.

Line 5 is the ACK of the order from the CME and the notification to the customer that the order is working.
 
Originally posted by riskless
I run FFastFill after trading for over 11 year at a firm even larger than IB. I ran an Electronic trading group in London that dominates the Market, so I still see you as Salesman.
More...

riskless,
i made my claims after confirming numerous orders that I have placed and after talking to our programmers and head of operations who both claim our speed is second to none. i even posted a log - sorry if i didn't post the log you were seeking. sorry if you wont' believe what I posted. our clients do as they see it every day. if it makes you happy, i'll post another log. you're like mike tyson. how many times can you get hit before you understand that you're not bigger and meaner than the next guy. however, i'll have to keep you in suspense as i am taking a vacation (i'll check in here just to keep you happy :). I'll post a log when I get back or if I can get the info from someone in the states beforehand. nevertheless, you still haven't addressed the point that in the end it is where you place the order not the speed that counts - when you're talking a couple of milliseconds.

now you run ffill? in another post you stated that you were just a programmer. and size means NADA - ROE and profits are what count. As for an electronic trading group dominating the market - what are you talking about? last i heard we're (timber) doing a pretty good market share across all of europe, the US and asia/australia. our return on equity aint too shabby either. on the same note, i'd be more than happy to give up market share to increase profits. But you're barking up the wrong tree. you won't get far arguing that another firm has been more innovative and successful when it comes to electronic trading of derivatives than the Timber Hill/IB Group. Since it also sounds that you're questioning my experience, I might as well add that I started working at timber in 85.

i assume you're calling me a salesman in a vain attempt to insult me. i have no problem looking in the mirror. yep, i wear two hats. I'm proud of both of them.
 
riskless,

for me there is no doubt that FFastFill is a performant system. But the stats you posted are perhaps a bit misleading as they do not include the delay between the Citrix Metaframe Server and the traders Citrix Client. It depends on the distance between Citrix Server and Client and of course network quality etc. how many milliseconds you have to add.

Markus
 
All I was looking for was the log a fully executed trade? The attempt at insulting you was obviously a bad move on my part. Sorry about that! This forum is very good and I do not want to be on here to just sell my product. Right now I stress speed in my posts, because when I ask traders to tell me the three most important things in a system: they typically respond: "Speed, Speed and Speed!"

In an earlier post, I stated that I was very much involved in the development of FFastFill's software, I never said that I was a developer. Sorry again about that misunderstanding.

I started trading in 86 at Dean Witter and moved to CRT in 89. Traded Options on the floor and on the screen for CRT, NBI and BOA for 11 years. Competed quite nicely against Timberhill in the Pound Options, but never really felt like they were very competitive in Bond Options or the Options markets in London. Our main competition was O'Connor/Swiss Bank, Hull Trading and Cooper Neff. I built an Electronic Trading Group that does quite honestly dominate the Fixed Income Options business on Eurex. At CRT speed was always stressed. I tried to bring that attitude to FFastFill and the System was designed for speed with a very high emphasis on Risk Management. With this emphasis, we have been able to facilitate some very active traders and an extremely successful propprietary trading group.

I posted two logs with full pre-trade Risk Management in place all the way from Click to fill on an executed order. I think that Puffy Gums was correct when he posted that the comparison is .21 IB and .28 for FFastFill on the initial Ack message. But the real measure is the full turnaround. The first message is effected by Pre-Trade Risk Management filters. Total Turnaround on a trade is Good Information and I am happy to pass my full along.

Let's not turn this into a pissing match, because it will just turn this Forum into a joke. Sorry again for the Sarcasm in the last few posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top