Stop Loss doesn't work any more - to lose is to lose. - page 7
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
There are limit bids and market bids - these concepts are official for the Moscow Exchange. The question of their technical implementation is secondary - it is clear that you cannot buy/sell at once, it all happens through convergence with a certain frequency.
All other variations are realised through the terminal on the broker's server and are also translated into limit or market orders when certain conditions occur.There are addressed orders, impersonal orders, limit orders, iceberg limit orders, stop orders, and stop limit orders. ALL !
There are no market orders !
A market order to buy (read as slang), is executed as a buy limit above the offer.
Market sell order (read as slang) is executed as a sell limit below the bid.
This is why market stop orders (slang for short), but they are sent to the exchange core as a limit.
Since the exchange sees them as a limit, you need a GO for stop orders (in your case this is a stop loss, again slang).
What the exchange writes in its manuals, it applies exchange slang!
The core of the exchange works differently, and this must be understood.
Just the question of technical implementation is paramount if you use algorithmic programs.
In my opinion, the argument is misplaced. Due to the lack of a clear concept of TERM.
Logically, stops may just as well be replaced by opposite orders (which is, in fact, what happens). The question of priority to execute - now that's a yes.
So the limit order is already on the exchange, while all sorts of stops are only on paper at the broker. Apparently due to the fact that GO is already accounted by the limit as zero (checked specifically - in the terminal the margin does not change (in MT5 it is GO)), the implementation of stops is impossible, because they are executed on market order. Here either the terminal should not allow taking them, or at least give a warning about risk of non-execution, or more correctly there should be a calculated assessment of risks and EB not at the time of transaction, but after its commission, i.e. there should be a calculation of consequences of the transaction, which does not happen! It is the fault of the broker and his software or the rules/regulations that do not happen.
There are limit bids, iceberg limit bids, stop bids, and stop limit bids. ALL !
There are no market orders!
What the exchange writes in their manuals, it applies stock exchange slang!
The core of the exchange works differently, and this must be understood.
Just the question of technical implementation is paramount if you write algorithmic programs.
Calm down :) The legal issue is primary, i.e. the premise is what they wanted to do, the implementation is secondary, if it does not match the premise, then the implementation is wrong and must be changed - this is in all such areas of human activity, except in reverse processes - the field of scientific research.
Icebergs are implemented by software, and are not provided for by the Plaza2 protocol as far as I know.
The exchange ordering the software, and I quote not the manuals, and it is a legally significant document - in court, it has priority, and if the exchange does not work in fact by it, then it is a violation on its part.
And then, there are no differences, except for terms - the essence does not change, what is more important to know that orders have flags on the priority of execution and market maker's orders are executed first.
By the way, as for the technical implementation, I prefer this quote
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and strategy testing
Fins in the stack - trying to understand what happened by ticks
prostotrader, 2019.04.19 19:31
And I argue that there are indeed 3 types of orders on FORTS,
but they are not market and limit orders (see type field)
Calm down :) The legal issue is primary, i.e. the premise is what they wanted to do, the implementation is secondary, if it does not match the premise, then the implementation is wrong and must be changed - this is in all such areas of human activity, except in reverse processes - the field of scientific research.
Icebergs are implemented by software, and are not provided for by the Plaza2 protocol as far as I know.
The exchange ordering the software, and I quote not the manuals, and it is a legally significant document - in court, it has priority, and if the exchange does not work in fact by it, then it is a violation on its part.
And then, there are no differences, except for terms - the essence does not change, what is more important to know that orders have flags on the priority of execution and market maker's orders are executed first.
By the way, as for the technical implementation, I prefer this quote
Yes, I understand the legal message, I just wanted to explain in more detail how bids work on the exchange.
I am not sure how many people read this topic, because after forex, they do not understand.
As for the priority and the implementation of the software, I have already said that this is not an improvement on the server MQ, why is there no checks?
As for the screenshot and type, everything is correct, only written as usual not clear (on purpose)
A quotation bid is the limit of the bid in the stack (liquidity).
Opposite bid - these are bids that take away liquidity.
FOK all or nothing is the condition of the bid.
But all these bids are essentially executed in the exchange core as a limit ))
Market bids are not observed ))
Mos exchange is a kind of kitchen, with constantly changing regulations.
The hedge field allows you to hold differently directed positions before clearing, on the same instrument.
Bids with different directions and equal volumes overlap in CS, i.e. they are zeroed.
So, this is the samehedge as in Forex.
In the Quik terminal this hedge can be done using comments to the order.
The structure of sending MQL orders also has comment fields, but it is not clear whether it is the same or not.
About the priority and the implementation of the software, I have already commented that this is not an improvement on the server MQ, why no checks? warnings, etc.
This is where the priority is still unclear, because it is not entirely clear where the broker or the clearing centre checks, and if the broker, whether there is an error in the implementation of the clearing centre's rules. And the fact that there is no information from the server (broker) to the client is a problem. I wonder if there is one in Quik?
As for the screenshot and the type, everything is correct, but it is written as usual not clear (on purpose)
Quik bid is the limit of the bid in the stack.
Counter application are applications that overlap your CS position.
FOK all or nothing is a condition of the bid.
Market bids are not observed ))
I am not sure that the counter bid is what decreases the GO, because it says that it is removed after the auction, while the auction is the moment of information, and the limit orders remain hanging, because we have two options of closing without increasing the GO - the market (including SL/TP) or by placing a limit order in the put. It looks more like a market order.
Field hedge allows you to hold differently directed positions before clearing, on the same instrument.
Bids that are equal in volume will overlap in CS, i.e. they are zeroed.
Thus, this is the samehedge as in Forex.
In the Quik terminal, this hedge can be done using a comment to the request.
The structure of sending MQL orders also has fields for comments but it is not clear whether it is the same or not.
What exactly is the comment that needs to be made in the order? And what will happen to the CS in this case?
This is where the priority is unclear, because it is not entirely clear where the broker or the clearing centre checks, and if the broker, whether there is an error in the implementation of the clearing centre's rules. And the fact that the client is not informed by the server (broker) is a problem. I wonder if there is one in Quik?
I'm not sure that the opposite order is what decreases the QR, because it says that it is removed after the auction, and the auction is the moment of information, while limit orders remain hanging, because we have two options for closing without increasing QR - the market (including SL/TP) or by placing a limit order in the market.
This is exactly what kind of comment we should make in the order? And what will happen to the SE in this case?
Most likely at the broker, clearing doesn't care about checks, it sums up the results for the session.
Yes, Quik informs about the shortage of GOs, and from your screenshots it was obvious that mt5 also informed that there is no money.
But no money for closing stop loss is just a disaster that developers need to change.
About the counter bid and CS, yes, my mistake, I meant for hedge position.
If the hedge position is equal in volume, the CS of both orders will overlap each other, that is zero.
At 50% overlap, it will be nullified by 50% and so on.
That is, you can manage the load on the CS, for example limit orders away from the market, and which you do not plan to have them open.
There is a comment field in the Quik order sending window, you can write anything, it's like a magician in mql.
But if you want to close a position or a limit that was issued with a comment, you have to enter the same comment.
And hedge position is active only until clearing, I don't remember if it is cleared daily or folded. I think it lives until the main evening clearing.
Most likely a broker, clearing does not care about checks, it sums up the result for the session.
It is not clear how to find out more about it - I can't figure it out from the documents yet. It is possible that I will write to a broker or an exchange, or maybe a clearing centre, on this matter.
Yes, Quik informs about the lack of GOs, and from your screenshots it was obvious that mt5 also informed about the lack of money.
I must try to reproduce the situation in Quik, but I still do not understand how to set TP/SL.
The broker sent me screenshots, it is visible on their server, and I also posted my log and it does not show anything like that - i.e. there is no information about margin shortage (GO)!
But no money for closing stop loss is just a disaster that developers need to change.
If everything happened according to the rules and there is no error, then at the moment of SL triggering counter limit should be removed, and then immediately put it back. Or do not put it back at all. Otherwise we have 30% of positions closed by Limit order instead of TP and we should freeze or else stops will not be triggered.
If the volume of hedge position is equal, CS of both orders will overlap each other, i.e. zero out.
There is a comment field in the Quik order sending window, you can write anything, it's like a magician in mql.
But if you want to close a position or a limit that was placed with a comment, you have to enter the same comment.
And hedge position is active only until clearing, I don't remember if it is cleared during the day or night. I think it lives until the main evening clearing.
By the way, for some reason I remember Quik freezing my money before clearing, even if there was profit after opening/closing... I could only open on the unused GO in the session, which annoyed me... hmm, or was it like that for stocks - I forget - I haven't switched it on for a long time now.
It is not clear how to find out more about it - I can't understand it from the documents yet. It is possible that I will write to a broker or an exchange, or maybe a clearing centre, on this matter.
I must try to reproduce the situation in Quik, but I still do not understand how to set TP/SL.
The broker sent me screenshots, it is visible on their server, and I also laid out my log and it does not show anything like that - i.e. there is no information about margin shortage (GO)!
If everything happened according to the rules and there is no error, then at the moment of SL triggering counter limit should be removed, and then immediately put it back. Or do not put it back at all. Otherwise we have 30% of positions closed by Limit order instead of TP and we should freeze or else stops will not be triggered.
By the way, for some reason I remember Quik freezing my money before clearing, even if there was profit after opening/closing... The only way to open was to use not yet used GO in the session, that annoyed me... hmm, or it was like that for shares - I forget, I didn't use it for a long time.
Ah, I see, it's a screenshot of the broker's log and I thought it was just the terminal.
For more information about trading on the forum, see forum on trading systems and trading strategy`s testing
I tried to open it with my hand and I did not know how to open it.
Aleksey Vyazmikin, 2019.09.07 16:17
Here's essentially a screenshot of how their system perceived the situation - this message was going round and round - just cut the piece out.
The question is where did this estimated margin of 6504.45 come from? What did it come from? The Sell Limit Order plus minus the same margin as the Buy Limit Order - let it be 4500, but it turns out that the margin was calculated as if it was planned to make an opening on the market at the moment! Why was the planned margin calculated that way?
But the fact that it's not happening on the client is a problem, and a very serious one at that.
I hope the developers or moderators are reading the thread and will understand that this is a serious problem with the terminal.
It would probably be better to report it in the bugs and errors thread.
Forget theTP/SL slang, and always treat your bids as limit and stop.
If you don't have enough GOs for "stop loss terminal", I wrote about it earlier, that you should check for limit orders, and if they are there, delete them.
Perhaps the freeze was from the previous session, and since the clearing session starts after the evening clearing, and goes to the next day, many people get confused.
In fact, all of today's settlement, starts after last night's evening clearing ))
A new cash settlement of all three sessions begins.
Not from the opening of the market at 10:00 as many people think.
By and large, I would not interpret the market opening at 10:00, but after the evening clearing.
In fact it is, many people don't realise this, and at 10:00 trading continues, but in the day session.
That's how tricky this MoS exchange is.